5 comments about See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism.

1. This is probably the best memoir I have come across by a former CIA case officer. Baer is spot on when it comes to how government operates. Who could ever imagine that those in the field are often times prevented from achieving superior results by risk averse management, or that those in Washington are too concerned about politics and/or "drinking and whoring" to comprehend what's truly unfolding beyond our borders? The truth can be ugly.



2. Robert Baer's account illustrates how American intelligence gathering capability was decapitated by bureaocrats and politicians. The author paints a vivid picture of work in the field as humint (human intelligence)was relegated to the back bench. Our enemies could not have done better than our own political establishment in neutralising the CIA. This book tells it all.
   
   Kingmaker



3. For those that think the goverment (not CIA) is here for you. This book should show you otherwise. For those conspiracy theorists...this should be right up your ally. Where is the justice in this country when such fine individuals can suffer through so much to keep us all safe....all in vain and all only so the richer can get richer. The government doesnt run this country, the "big oil" does. This will never change. Great book, great read.



4. Excellent story that provides an inside view of life on the ground for CIA operatives.
   
   Much of the book revolves around the Middle East and Mr. Baer's search for those responsible for bombings in Lebanon. One name that comes up frequently was a terrorist by the name of Imad Moughniyah. This person was involved in the Beirut embassy and Marine barracks bombings, the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, kidnapping of Terry Anderson, hijacking of TWA flight 847, etc...By coincidence, Moughniyah was assassinated in Syria on the day that I finished reading this book. I must assume that was good news to Mr. Baer.
   
   Some of the stories he tells of bureaucratic ineptness do not engender a great deal of confidence in the CIA..."As the civil war in Afghanistan started to boil, I repeatedly asked for a speaker of Dari or Pashtun...to debrief the flood of refugees coming across the border...I was told there were no Dari or Pashtun speakers anywhere...Headquarters instead offered to send out a four-person sexual harassment briefing team."
   
   Near the end of his career, he seemed to descend into a self-destructive pattern of behavior that only got worse after he returned from the Middle East. In my opinion, he had spent so much time looking at the trees (and individual leaves) that he got lost in the forest.
   
   His closing comments, however, are right on the mark..."It all comes down to the point that we have to start listening to people again, no matter how unpleasant the message is."
   
   Overall a good book about very brave men who were willing to take significant risks for their country.



5. A rambling CIA agent's tale of working in the Middle East pre Bush Administration. Baer recently appeared on television after the 2008 car bomb death of Imad Mugniyah in Syria and clearly knows about which he speaks because, in this 2002 book, he describes his investigation of the 1983 bombing of the American Embassy in Beirut and the death of William Buckley, the CIA agent. He fingers the killer. Beyond the scattered nature of his writing, the crazy dangerous life of this CIA agent is detailed including the bureaucratic handcuffs and leg irons placed on the operational side agents from home base at Langley. Baer, no friend of Anthony Lake, describes how the operations division of the Agency was hamstrung during the Clinton years. The Crown Book publishers editing is very poor; e.g., Aldrich Ames is Rick, Robert Hanssen is spelled Robert Hannsen. Sentences, often conversational in format, run on and off the page. The CIA editors were more exacting than the Crown editors who appear out to lunch at the time of final editing.

5 comments about War Letters: Extraordinary Correspondence from American Wars.

1. There are letters from `very' different types of people such as George W. Bush (after he was shot down) and from George McGovern (who was a bomber pilot). I really don't care whose side (politically speaking) the authors of the various letters represent as long as it deals with the stated topic (WAR LETTERS). This is why I only gave the book 3 stars. What in the blue blazes are letters from Helen Keller (who is writing about a friend she once knew who is now in jail for being an American commie) & a letter from the American commie traitor Alger Hiss doing in the book? Neither of these letters even remotely have anything to do with an American War.
   There are other letters which also have very little to do with a U.S. war but I looked over these as they `sort of' and that is a stretch - were leading up to a war. I do not know for sure - but I believe the author is a left of center sort of guy and it comes through in the letters he chose.



2. This book is a great read. It is refeshing to be able to read words, thoughts and dreams from people as they perform such honorable duty overseas. This book is powerful and should be required reading for all, especially Americans.
   
   Some anti-war activist may think it is "pro-war" but it isn't just that. This book reveals personal thoughts and challenges faced by American military personnel in wars from the Civil War until the later conflicts in the 20th century. It is pro-war, anti-war and everything in between.
   
   This book reminds me of the sacrifice that so many make for their country. It is a great tribute for those who have served.



3. i only gave it three stars because many of the stories were more about patriotism than about the war themselves. Of course every book has its bias so its still a useful and moving read when taken with this grain of salt.



4. I received this book as a gift because my family knows I love reading personal histories from those who lived it and "War Letters" seemed perfect for that. I enjoy learning what life was like for the average citizen in an era, whether its someone riding the Erie Canal in 1840, a foot soldier in the American revolution, or a journal from the Civil War.
   
   This is a remarkable book and taken individually there are many, many heart-rending emotional stories that probably need to be read by many people. It does in fact put a personal face on war. Because it is a collection of letters, the book is easily read in short spurts; you don't want (and shouldn't) read this book quickly.
   
   I only gave the book 4 stars because I actually found it hard to read. While the personal letters (the spelling, mannerisms of the authors) help tell their stories, it also keeps the book from developing any flow. Some letters are agonzingly slow to read and understand. I'm certainly not faulting the authors or their stories; but if you're looking for a great, well-written, smooth-flowing story that you can't put down, this isn't it.



5. I actually read a review about this book and gave it as a gift to my sister-in-law who teaches high school history. She LOVES it and told me it was an amazing collection of actual letters. She said all of the teachers that she works with have been borrowing it!!

5 comments about Cigars, Whiskey and Winning: Leadership Lessons from General Ulysses S. Grant.

1. This book is a quick read. I particularly enjoyed the author's focus on Grant's ability to react, adjust and adapt. Staying away from Grant's presidency was a good idea until the end. Even then, the author contrasts Grant's leadership style as a General to President and why he failed (at least historically) as a politician. What I didn't like about the book was the lack of reference to God. I understand that not everyone is firmly rooted in "the Word", but its absence leads to more questions...at least for me. Overall, thought provoking, mildly insightful and interesting. I heartily recommend Lee's Leadership Lessons. It is the best book of this style I have ever read.



2. I've never been a fan of "lessons" books and here is yet another. There are some interesting and informative quotes of/from Grant, but the lessons are, at best, better than average for such a book. -- Louis J Sheehan



3. Grant may have been a poor President, but he was a great General. This book expounds the leadership principles of his war years. Grant was not only decisive, but he could also admit to mistakes. His treatment of his fellow officers shows he was a born leader. In three years, he rose from being a store clerk to a four star general. He did this using his courage, common sense, and good decision making. Lincoln may have saved the Union through his political leadership, but U.S. Grant saved it militarily with his good leadership.
   
   This is a easy to read book. The book is in excess of three hundred pages, but most of the pages are not full. Some two hundred and fifty principles are detailed in the leadership of U.S. Grant. Too bad Grant did not use some of these principles in his Presidency.



4. Kaltman has done the research for you and put it all in a great lesson by lesson format. Any leader can refer to this book for day to day operations.



5. Very good read for anyone in management.
   Uses the Civil War memoires of U.S. Grant to illustrate management skills and practices.
   Very interesting. Excellent gift for men.

5 comments about Jefferson Davis, American.

1. Like many of the reviewers, I think this is very good. I came to this biography because I wanted to understand The Civil War better from the perspective of the South. This book covers that well in that it does provide a good overview of how Davis viewed equality as being about equality and balance between the states in the union and not equality between people. For Davis, the Constitution was primarily about the interactions between states.
   
   On the reviews that say that the book glosses over Davis's owning of slaves, I saw these sections differently. It appears that Cooper did not have any evidence that Davis had abused his slaves in the cruel sense. So, he can't write that. However, just the simple description of how many slaves Davis owned, how old they were (adult, old, and children), and how Davis's slave "assets" grew from the birth of children was disgusting to me. There did not need to be cruelty for the idea that a child born into slavery could not decide on their own future. While it is hard for me to fathom how Davis could speak of liberty while owning slaves, Cooper did a good job of framing how Davis probably thought about slavery. In the end, the overview made me more thankful to have not lived in those times, just as living in even more ancient times would have been even worse.
   
   The other sections that I found interesting were the descriptions of Davis' participation in the Mexican War. Having recently read a biography of James Polk and now this, I think I will have to look for a good history of the Mexican War.
   
   Lastly, I agree with the reviewer that the book needed an epilogue that spoke to Varina Davis's last years. Throughout the book, she is a large part of the story and to stop the book with Jefferson's death just didn't work.



2. It is rare that a biographer can capture both the essence of his/her subject and the historical context of that particular subject's time. Cooper not only does so, he does so brilliantly, like no other biographer of Davis has done to date. Cooper focuses less on Davis's role as leader of a doomed Confederate Nation and more on his accomplishments as a Mississippi politician. That is not to say that Cooper ignores Davis's role in the Confederate war effort and national politics. He writes extenisvely on the friction between Davis and two of his leading Generals, explaining how Davis went from being a luke-warm secessionist to the most ardent Confederate Nationalist in the South. Cooper also focuses on Davis's role in the Mexican War and his youth at West Point, his managing of slaves, his friction with his wife, and his constant battles with weak health. Cooper also focuses rather extensively on Davis's time after the war and his travels abroad. In this excellent biography, Cooper captures Davis the man, not Davis the symbol of a lost cause, setteling ultimately on Davis as a patriot and American.



3. Alone among historical events from which the participants are all dead, our Civil War continues to ignite passions. Many treat the issues as current, and see the personages as a still-living presence. Trust me; I live in a suburb of Richmond, and see it all the time. Up front, let me say that I respect President Davis; I visit his house and grave, and contribute to the maintenance of both.
   
   Was Davis the right man for the job? He was probably the best man available. Bob Toombs? He would have been perfect if he could have been depended on to be sober. Breckinridge? Sure, but he was Vice President of the United States when the Confederacy was formed, and he also knew which end the bottle poured out of. Louis Wigfall? Brilliant, loyal, but an alcoholic hot-head. Alex Stephens? Please. A brilliant man; a good and decent man, but not a true leader.
   
   This is an absolutely outstanding biography of a very difficult man to study. Sure, it's a long book, but Davis' life was long, and complicated. Reading it, one doesn't notice the length; Cooper is such a superb writer that this is a "page turner". Davis gets full cradle to grave coverage. The tough issues are in no wise avoided. His early education, West Point training, and U.S. Army career are all well documented. The stories of Davis' all too brief marriage to Sarah Knox Taylor, and the subsequent seven years of isolation are particularly poignant. Marriage to Varina gave him a second start, and he made the most of it. To my mind, Varina Davis is the absolute definition of "First Lady".
   
   Jeff Davis was a man of his time and place. Before anyone would criticize him, it is well to reflect on the danger of applying the standards of our day to a man from another; Thomas Jefferson, Ty Cobb, even FDR, all came from a different age; so did Jeff. In his day, the right [NOT wisdom] of secession was assumed; the White man's right to own, and obligation to care for, the Black were instilled from birth. On the record, Davis was probably as humane a slave owner as existed anywhere. Only once did he ever break up a family, and that was after much begging by the slave. Davis DID NOT want secession; he followed reluctantly.
   
   The tragedy of Jefferson Davis is that he was called to lead a country founded on State's Rights, which was then done-in by State's Rights. Vain, obstinate, and difficult, he was loyal and devoted. His mistakes are not glossed over. His loyalty to a fool like Lucius Northrop, and his tragic inability to get the most out of Joe Johnston and Beauregard are both part and parcel of the man. One of Jeff's flaws was the inability to work with people he didn't like, which FDR, for example, did quite well. One of his very worst errors was in thinking that Braxton Bragg was a field commander; placed behind a desk in Richmond, Bragg could have done for Davis what Marshall did for Roosevelt. By the time Bragg got his desk, it was too late. Davis could also be unwaveringly supportive of great men, like Robert E. Lee, and Judah Benjamin. Was his overall strategic vision the correct one? Who knows? A case can certainly be made either way. Jeff tried his best; I doubt anyone could have done better. Though some may call him obstinate, his strength and refusal to quit kept the country going long after others would have given up.
   
   If I have to criticize something about a great book, it's this: Jeff had a lot of health problems [which may well have affected his job performance], and they are documented as if writing for physicians. No problem here, but...while Plasmodium falciparum and herpetic keratoiritis may be perfectly understandable to me, others may need explanation. You may know a lot about the Civil War, but your knowledge is incomplete unless you know something about the political leaders behind the Generals. Reading this book will be time well spent.



4. I thought this was a good book. William Davis' "Davis" was better in that it gave a more honest personal portrayal. However, and editors do listen up, most of us in the real world don't have time to read an immense book. Keep succinct; keep around 300-350 pages. Thank you.



5. With so many reviews already, it is hard to add much so I'll keep this short and sweet. This is a great book and the seminal biography of Davis. Historians will be hard pressed to top Cooper's work. The book on the years preceding the Civil War were, at times, not overly inspiring, but the chapters on the war years and Davis' post-war life more than made up for it. Page turning reading and solid research to boot. This book is the best kind of history--readable, entertaining, yet solidly researched and educational as well. Having read other books that discussed Davis in varying capacities, I feel like I have a much better grasp on Davis the man than ever before. Highly recommended for any and all history buffs.

5 comments about Thieves of Baghdad.

1. There were many aspects of the art recovery story that were both useful and interesting. Especially the use of the human resources of experienced police, prosecutors and the museum staff. It was regretable that so much laudatory, sometimes self evident and eventually irritating material about the author was seen as desirable. This aspect detracted from the authority of the author and the work.



2. Colonel Matthew Bogdonos did a great service by writing about his account; however, I must completely agree with a prior review regarding this egotistical author. Being a former Marine and an undergraduate in Historical Studies, he discredited his book by boasting. A book of this scope should be strengthened by facts, sources, and even personal experiences, as long as the ego can be left out of it. While I was satisfied with the book, I wouldn't recommend this book unless one could forgive the semantics.



3. Colonel Bogdanos has a fascinating tale of the war on terror, Iraqi reconstruction, and the recovery of stolen artifacts. Unfortunately, the author's ego too often overshadows the amazing tale.
   
   Certainly the author had the opportunity to witness history-changing events. He was a neighbor who saw the destruction of the twin towers. He visited Afghanistan and saw the trouble of rebuilding the remote country. Then he went through Iraq and finally settled in the Iraq museum in Baghdad, helping recover and protect artifacts.
   
   Unfortunately, Bogdanos' boasting occurs early and often. He recounts how he evacuated his building in lower Manhattan after the towers fell. Reading his description makes it sound like he escorted his family through a war zone. He was packing a gun, hustling past roadblocks, and scanning for threats. My initial thoughts were "Didn't thousands of other people make this same passage safely ... and without nearly as much machismo?"
   
   Based on his biographical overview, you'd think the author single-handedly came up with the idea of protecting the Iraq Museum, that he was the one who developed the plans to recover the stolen artifacts, and (best yet) that he was responsible for developing inter-agency anti-terror training.
   
   My impression is that he was a part of those efforts, but that he had a lot of (understated) partners. Reading his book, you will see no such partners. Instead you will see a lot of underlings who are grateful for such a smart leader. You will see two types of supervisors: the bumbling ones who overlook Bogdanos' obvious qualifications and contributions, and the intelligent ones who give Bogdanos the authority to fulfill the mission only he can accomplish.
   
   A good story of post-war Iraq is in this book. Unfortunately, Bogdanos' bravado distracts too much from it.



4. This book for several reasons did not impress me. First, Bogdanos drops a lot of names of "important" people that enlist his help and vice-versa. Problem is, they're just names to the reader. I don't know these people from Adam and the author does very little to "flesh them out". Second, his need to continually quote famous historical figures to prove he is a well-educated serviceman not only shows his insecurities and self-righteousness but also slows the story to a snail's pace. While he claims to be telling a story about marines and the wonderful work they do, rather than himself, he engages in some pretty heavy self-glorification. Third, while he denies couching any of his story in political partisanship, the political theater that he participates in is filled with Republican "good ol' boys". Some of the justifications Bagdanos gives for the military's reluctance to safe guard museums and archaeological sites seems valid while other reasons do not. I saw Matthew Bogdanos at a lecture in Indianapolis this spring. His haughty demeanor did not dispel any of the reservations I feel about this bias account. On the positive side, Bogdanos does give the reader a picture of the historical significance of Mesopotamian artifacts and background on the domestic and colonial personalities that helped shape present day Iraq. His passion for history cannot be denied. He also gives some of the Western media as well as the Iraqi museum staff positive credit. However, for a truly humbling account of the "shock and awe" aftermath, please read Lawrence Anthony's "Babylon's Ark".



5. Matthew Bogdanos' story of the lost antiquities of the Bahgdad Museum is a fascinating and informative account of his experiences with an interagency counterterrorism unit following 9/11. However, its not just about Bahgdad, as he tells us about the challenges he faces growing up in downtown New York, his roots in Greek and Middle Eastern classics, etc. In fact, despite the extraordinary depth of his knowledge of classic literature, arts, and history, there is a certain air of self-promotion throughout the book that the reader just can't overlook. Nonetheless, I found Bogdanos' writing to be sophisticated and interesting and I felt that I finished his book with a better understanding of U.S. efforts to help the Iraqi people help themselves (despite the efforts of their fellow Iraqi's to sell their own heritage to the highest bidders). The beautiful photos add great depth to Bogdanos' account and spark the reader's interest in the history and art of the region. Enjoy this highly unusual account of one man's war time experiences.

5 comments about The Long Walk: The True Story of a Trek to Freedom.

1. After reading snippets of this book for years, I finally got it. The story was interesting and entertaining from the initial captivity in the European prisoner camp, through the trek to the Siberian camp, until the end of the long walk that led from Siberia to freedom.



2. This book was impossible to put down. If I hadn't known it was a true story, I would have thought it fiction. The human spirit and longing for freedom is truly the basis for their endeavor.



3. "The Long Walk" is Polish Army officer Slavomir Rawicz's gripping account of an escape from a Soviet labor camp in Siberia in 1941. According to his story, Rawicz and his comrades walked South across the interior of Asia to freedom in British India. This journey across a winter landscape in Siberia, the Gobi Desert in Mongolia, and the mountains of western China and Tibet, is, if true, an unparalleled acount of suffering and human endurance. The BBC claims to have found records indicating that Rawicz was in fact released by the Soviets to a refugee camp in Iran during the Second World War. If these records are accurate, the main event of "The Long Walk" is an enthralling work of fiction. Readers will have to make their own judgement.
   
   Rawicz was a young Polish Cavalry officer taken prisoner by the Soviets when Hitler and Stalin divided Poland in 1939. He is tortured by the Soviets and sentenced as a spy to 25 years in a labor camp in Siberia. The suffering of the winter journey to the labor camp is bad enough, but once there, Rawicz and six of his fellow prisoners hatch an escape plan. One night, they slip away, carrying a small amount of food, a hand axe, and an improvised knife. They will travel cross-country South to Mongolia, along the way picking up a young Polish female who has also escaped from detention. The eight will dare unbelievable hazards, including a chronic lack of food, water, and shelter, to steer more or less South toward India. Only four people will reach safety in India.
   
   Rawicz's narrative is rather bare bones, possibly the result of translation from his native Polish. Traveling by the sun, the small group never has much more than a general sense of where they are or what is in front of them. Their survival is the incredible result of ingenuity and pluck, as the travelers plumb the absolute limits of human endurance and receive timely help from strangers along the way. The reader cannot help but be caught up in the terrible suspense of the story.
   
   Other reviewers have commented that Rawicz's story seems a little too good to be true. Certainly the hazards of the journey would have killed many parties far better prepared; Rawicz and his comrades seem to enjoy astonishingly good luck. "Mr. Smith", the Russian-speaking American in the group, seems especially mysterious and preternaturally self-possessed in the face of their many obstacles. The alleged encounter with two Yeti in the Himalayas strains credibility. Perhaps the best advice for readers is to put aside their skepticism and enjoy the story as presented.



4. I bought this book with great anticipation, having read and enjoyed other survival tales such as "Endurance" and "In the Heart of the Sea." I've been slogging through the uninspired language for the past month with great difficulty. The lack of passion Rawicz brings to his writing is perhaps a clue that this is not a true story, as some have attested. Or maybe it's a problem with the translation. Either way, I don't find this to be the gripping tale it could have been.
   
   I should add that I have been reading this under the assumption that it was true. So discovering now that it may not be true has not in any way affected my review; I thought it was boring before then. I wish I had known about the controversy and had picked a different book. Other reviewers have stated that it is an exciting and remarkable story, true or not. I disagree. If it is true it is a dull and lifeless transcription of a remarkable feat. If it is fiction than the author has not only lied but written a boring book.



5. Sunday, March 26, 2006
   "The Long Walk" by Slavomir Rawicz, © 1956
   This is an amazing story. It is incredible that the torturers in the U.S. Army did not read this or take lessons from the KGB, because some of their tortures are very similar to what is described in this book. But that is only in the first two chapters. The rest of the book is the story of Mr. Rawicz's walk with his cohorts from United Soviet Socialist Republic labor camp in Siberia to India. The walk starts with advise to walk south, not east, to avoid the obvious route and, therefore, obvious pursuit.
   The oddest part of this story is that one of the particpants is known only as Mr. Smith. He is an American of unknown origins. No one on this trek is cognizant of the reason of their incarceration, but Mr. Smith is so unknown that even his Christian name is never known. The next oddest part of this story is in the preface. It was supposed to be a story about people who have encountered Yeti. These fellows saw some on their walk through the Himalayas, so the assistant to the author, Ronald Downing, reseaching for a story about the Yeti, came across this amazing story.

5 comments about Home Before Morning: The Story of an Army Nurse in Vietnam.

1. Had to read it for History class. Decent book if you are a nurse or had any experience with post traumatic stress, divorce, or Vietnam. Very interesting book, check it out



2. This is such a beautiful story; and one that needs to be told more often. It will give so much understanding to the generation born to those who came "of age" in the 1960's of what the VietNam war was all about. And, not many people knew anything about the role of the Army Nurse until now. This book is a must read!



3. I had read this book years ago and lost it after many moves. I wanted to read it again, with everything happening in Iran.
   This book helps one to really understand what our soldiers and medical staff go through during a war and for the rest of their lives. I recommend it as a must read book.



4. Based on my personal observations, Lynda was the laughing stock of the 71st Evac Hospital. And, she was also almost universally disliked. You had to tolerate her. But, you didn't have to like her. I heard alot from her other "friends" there in 1971. And, I was unfortunate enough to have to spend an afternoon, sitting in a jeep in downtown Pleiku, while she and a friend were wined and dined, so I observed her interactions firsthand. She was laughed at constantly because she was always trying to get out of doing something. But, that was Vietnam's fault. Not hers.
   
   The book is not even good fiction. About 95% of the happenings she claimed never occurred. If they occurred they occurred to someone else, someplace else. The majority of the book is nothing but flights of fancy from a woman that wouldn't know the truth if it bit her. Every problem she ever had, since 1969, was blamed on Vietnam, the people she worked with, the war, the weather, whatever. Not one time in her book did she ever take responsibility for her actions and the repercussions she got from bad decisions.
   
   My review of this book is not as fluent as others. But, my statements are based on personal experience with the subject matter of her and this book firsthand. I was there, I know.



5. I read this book for the first time many years ago now and it touched a cord in me simply at the time I was going thru something similar myself being discharged from the military and finding that you really have no place in the world. I never experienced anything like she did and how she overcame all her obstacles only attests to the strength of the person she became because of it. I believe she has passed on now due to exposure of agent organge while serving our country. I always try to make people see just what sacrifices that our fighting men and women go thru to keep us free that we never even hear about except very rarely in such books as this one. "They" don't want this kind of information coming out to let us know just what has really gone on. This continues to be one of my favorite books and I generally wind up reading it a few times a year. It's one book that will never be let go. It is well worth reading and I guarantee you it will make you think and be appreciative of the little things that we all take for granted.

5 comments about Sagittarius Rising.

1. This book is well written, interesting to read even if you don't know anything about airplanes, and informative about history of first world war airwar. I think it was worth the money.



2. Mostly, Sagittarius Rising is a "War" book of interest to aviation and history buffs. But, the writing is so interesting and imaginative, readers without deep passion for planes or period are likely to start...and not stop until the last page.
   
   Lewis writes with a rare gift for pictures and even structure. Readers of pleasure will appreciate the work like it were a good meal. Historians, however, may find Sagittarius a little light on details, but the book's credibility and authority seems solid.
   
   If you're reading this review, you obviously have an interest in the arena - Sagittarius Rising is an excellent seat.



3. This account of WWI aviation is a unique version not found in other books from this time period. It gives an inside look into the thoughts and feelings of a combat aviator during the infant days of aerial combat. A must have for any WWI aviation buff. I truely enjoy reading this book.



4. The author covers many different aspects of being an English WW I pilot. He ranges from the limitations of the WW I airplanes (the wings fall off!), rapid tech advancements during the war (machine gun interupter gears), to being young, to the stress of combat, to views on stopping wars, etc. Pleasant read and highly recommended to anyone interested in air warfare in WW I. He does go off on little preachy tangents sometimes, but they are short and fit into the overall book just fine. This is a personal story, so don't expect a broader picture of the war.



5. If you want to read a book which perfectly describes the atmosphere and meaning of flying in the first air war, then this is it.

5 comments about Dumb but Lucky!: Confessions of a P-51 Fighter Pilot in World War II.

1. This was not an easy read. The writer is so proud of his status as a maverick, that it invades the whole book, and makes one wonder why he wrote it at all. Compared to the Red Badge of Courage, or All Quiet on the Western Front, Saving Private Ryan, etc. it is an almost silly attempt to describe his experiences as a P51 pilot. He should have been court marshalled.



2. I am a big fan of this book. The author was a human guinea pig who was sent to a front line fighter group with minimal training, as the government wanted to see how little training pilots could receive and still be effective and survive. This is not the usual account of a figher pilot, who normally tells you exactly how good he was. He candidly informs you how unprepared he was. The title says it all. I am also glad to hear about a unit and theater of war that is not often written about or published. The Eighth Airforce and the Fifteenth Airforce were partners that worked together to keep the enemy off balance. Together they did much to finish Nazi Germany. The Mighty Eighth is well covered in many books, especially a handful of groups. You could fit all that is written on the fifteenth on a short shelf. I found the author engaging and humorous. He also helps you see the ugly side of war, even though he flies the "glamorous" P-51 Mustang.



3. The author served in the same fighter squadron as the man that I was later named after, who like many others gave the ultimate sacrifice. I found this book very enlightening, because it is not just a recount of the military strategy and the tactics of air battles, but a broad description of the culture, technology, training and hardships of a very young man doing his patriotic duty with honor. Mr Curtis reveals some of the reckless and foolish things that he and others did, and the lucky and un-lucky pilots that he served with. His colorful descriptions of the pilot's life in P-51 Mustangs and in Italy paint an vivid picture. The long-distance love story with his one-and-only Myrt adds another dimension.



4. This is a well-written book with all the fears, mishaps and accomplishments of the young men who gave so much for us to be free!



5. This is a wonderful account of the truth of a mustang. The plane was a danger as much as a wonderful fighter. The story is also great of a life and time most people have forgotten.

5 comments about Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers.

1. This provides Ellsberg's history behind his release of the Pentagon Papers. Included is (obviously) his motivation and reasoning behind why he thought they had to be released to the press. In addition, there is a discussion of his the papers themselves but, ironically, the weakness of the book was not enough discussion/analysis of the papers and the conclusions reached therein.



2. Ellsberg is a driven man--driven toward solving puzzles and righting that which is wrong. The intensity of his intellect and the breadth of his insider experience would have made Daniel Ellsberg an amazing historian of the Vietnam War even if he hadn't become an anti-war activist. The fact that he had--in the end--studied both sides, and that eventually he had access not only to the Pentagon Papers but also the Nixon Whitehouse tapes allowed him to explain the war and its perpetrators with a rare combination of vividness and authority.
   
   Judging from what is written in today's newspapers, the patterns Ellsberg describes in Secrets are repeating themselves in the Iraq War. _Secrets_ deserves to be widely read, as a lesson in courage, as history, and as a warning to those of us who might be tempted to sit back and trust unquestioningly those who would lead us into war then resist bringing us back out.



3. Just got it today, but know that my son will enjoy reading it. He loves history and asked for this book specifically.



4. A year into the Iraqi war, an increasing number of people are comparing the debacle to the quagmire that was Vietnam. In one interview about the American torture of Iraqi prisoners, even Secretary of State Colin Powell made an unsolicited comparison with the Mai Lai massacre. Most people now acknowledge that the Bush administration has been less than candid about not only the war in Iraq but also its policies and decisions before and after the 9/11 attacks. Enter Daniel Ellsberg.
   
   In this memoir Ellsberg documents how five successive presidential administrations (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon) systematically lied to the American people and to congress about the Vietnam war. His story is especially compelling because (similar to John Kerry in at least this regard), he served patriotically in Vietnam, only to have that experience convince him how terribly wrong his own government was about the war. As a Marine company commander in Vietnam, Ellsberg was an enthusiastic supporter of the war. But two years of wading through swampy jungles, and extended study of classified documents, convinced him that government rhetoric and empirical realities were two very different things. Ellsberg came home and became an outspoken critic of the war, and in an aggressive effort to stop the war he leaked the so-called Pentagon Papers to congress and then to the media, 7,000 pages in 47 volumes of top secret documents.
   
   The lesson? Citizens would be naïve to believe all that its government says or to support all that it does. Christians, especially, believe that Caesar is not God. This was a radical notion in the early centuries of the faith, for in the Roman Empire Caesar was god, and believers paid dearly for it with two centuries of martyrdom. In fact, as Bernard Lewis has observed, it is to Christianity that we owe the novel idea of a distinctly secular state, as opposed to theocracies such as ancient Israel or modern Iran (or emerging Iraq?). If the state is secular and not sacred, if Caesar is not God, if our recent governments have shown their near pathological propensity to lie about matters large and small, and if most all governments must as a practical necessity use brutal and coercive powers to protect national interests and deliberate neglect of the weak where there is no national interest (Rwandan genocide), then it might deserve our allegiance, yes, but also our loyal opposition.



5. After finishing this book, I think the one thing that I'm left awestruck by is how little we as a country have learned in the intervening years. Daniel Ellsberg's detailed, yet gripping account of how he went from an anti-communist cold-warrior to an anti-Vietman war protestor and activist is, at times draining, at others infuriating, and yet always thoroughly engrossing.
   
   He starts the book detailing how, as a political analyst he was eventually allowed access to some of the most highly classified documentation the goverment has, including the 7000 page collection known as the Pentagon Papers. A highly detailed look at the behind the scenes machinations that led the U.S. to go from an advisory role to the French in Vietnam, to actively participating in and continued escalation of the conflict. Those documents allowed him to see exactly how far from the truth official statements from the various administrations to the public and Congress were, even to the point of outright lying about getting out of Vietnam when they were in fact escalating involvement in the war.
   
   Mr. Ellsberg goes on to inform the reader how his access to this information led him to eventually denounce the war as criminal, how he attempted to help stop it through "proper channels", which led to nowhere, and eventually how he decided to leak the Pentagon Papers to the press, knowing full well the toll that it would likely take on his friends and family. Although, this singular act of courage wasn't enough to stop the war in and of itself, it was a stepping stone to its end.
   
   What struck me most as I was reading, was the incredible similarity to events going on now, right down to almost vertabum administration statements made to the public. At that time, administration officials would question the patriotism of those who didn't support the war. They called papers that printed leaked classified information, and the leakers themselves, criminal and claimed that to do so was harmful to national security. There are numerous other examples, but I encourage you to read the book for yourself. If for no other reason than to learn how easily it is for our elected officials to lie to us, and get away with it.
   
   I wish that after reading this book I could say that we've moved past all of this, that our country has learned and it could never happen again. However, I think the similarities between this dark time in our history and the Iraq war has gone a long way to proving that isn't the case.
   
   Read this book. Even ignoring my view of the parallels to the Iraq war, this is a highly gripping and educational look at the history and policies that led to our involvement in the Vietnam war. It's a viewpoint that you will never see in any dry classroom textbook and I think that everyone needs to learn just how humanly fallible our elected officials can be.