1 comments about The Real Guardians: Five True Stories of Coast Guard Heroes and Their Rescues in New Orleans Following Hurricane Katrina.

1. Anyone who sat glued to CNN during the aftermath of Katrina will appreciate these personal tales of rescue participation from Coast Guard personnel. Written in a casual, conversational style, this book will appeal equally to adults and young adults. It would make an excellent gift for any student considering there future career options, since the book outlines a variety of vocational choices within the organization. While showing how challenging it is to become a member of these rescue teams, it also illustrates the variety of choices which led each of these individuals to their vocation, and makes the challenge seem attainable. In this day and age, when truly valuable role models appear to be in short supply, these profiles provide a useful counterpoint to rap stars and rock bands. This book would be equally useful on the shelves of career counselors, and in classrooms studying Katrina.

5 comments about The Peabody Sisters: Three Women Who Ignited American Romanticism.

1. 
   It's sad to envision the everyday unfairness faced by these three enterprising women. Megan Marshall describes how Elizabeth assesses if it is appropriate for a woman to establish a bookstore, how Sophia accepts that she will never see Italy because she is not married and how Mary quietly waits, waits and waits... in disguised desperation for the man she loves. Elizabeth suffers whispering campaigns, digs on her appearance and from loneliness as her sisters find true love with the men for whom she provides the entre.
   
   The Peabody women not only contend with a social structure which accepts unfairness to women, these family breadwinners face the downward mobility of their time. They compete with male teachers and artists who have an education from which females are excluded. The sisters' access to the synergy of a network is compromised by the mores of the time which destroys reputations for the least sign of familiarity with men who comprise the network. The progressive men in Elizabeth's circle may give her support, but it is always qualified. While she could not succeed without these men, Bronson Alcott being the most egregious example, each takes more than he gives.
   
   The 3 Peabody brothers are not just lackluster but also irresponsible towards the family. The one who survives to middle age might just be the "Joe Six Pack" of his day. An appraisal of family dynamics considering communication patterns, paternal (lack of) nurturing and birth order would be interesting.
   
   Elizabeth is clearly the star of the show. She is the one to whom the modern world can more closely relate. She dominates the biography as she probably dominated the lives of her siblings, a dominance both used and resented by her sisters. She is remarkably alone.
   
   The ideas that Elizabeth and her transcendentalist friends proposed are now mainstream. Like all who are ahead of their time, they were met with both skepticism and outright hostility. I was struck by how the break from Calvinist self abnegation was the opening for what we call today, self-esteem. While I often wonder how Washington, Adams and Jefferson could relate to today's world, Elizabeth as presented by Marshall, would be even more at home now than then.
   
   For reseach and documentation, this is a 5 star book. I give it 4 because there are times when the documentation gets in the way of the prose making it too academic for the general reader. Also, the book abruptly ends. In a short chapter called "Epilogue May 1, 1843" the sisters' next 40+ years are summed up. I hope there is a volume 2. I'd like to know more of the sisters as the Civil War develops and unfolds.
   
   Interesting that this was a runner up for the Pulitzer Prize in 2006. Prize winners in 2008 and 2007 are Eden's Outcasts: The Story of Louisa May Alcott and Her Father and The Most Famous Man in America: The Biography of Henry Ward Beecher respectively. Is it that this period of history has captured the reading and reviewing audience or has it captured the best writers of our times?



2. The author attempts to run the three biographies in parallel but what really happens is that she jumps from one place to the other, so none of the biographies unfold properly. I found it utterly unreadable. On top of it to add to my frustration, there are generalities, like Elizabeth fought with her mother "like all adolescent girls do" or romantic creations "like on this day if you didn't watch out a dog might have showered you with water". I wanted to read a proper biography and not a society novel. I had read "Eden's Outcasts" by John Matteson before and came away with a more lively picture of Elizabeth Peabody and her involvment in the Temple School then from this book. If you are interested in the transcendentalist movement, the time, or women I highly recommend "Eden's Outcasts: The story of Louisa May Alcott and her father".



3. The Peabody Sisters is a wonderful book. It was so interesting and fast-paced, it reads like a novel. The women of the Transcendentalist Movement have been so poorly remembered it is possible to learn something new on every page. Megan Marshall's writing style is relaxed and conversational, a good balance to the 19th century melodrama, angst, sentimentality, and lofty philosophies of the sisters and their circle. Although Marshall quotes letters, sermons, poetry, reviews, journals, reports, and literature from many sources, it is done sparingly and logically integrated.
   
   The Peabody sisters were extraordinary women living in extraordinary times. A case can be made that Elizabeth Peabody, the oldest sister, is one of the most important figures in Transcendentalism. Barred from college and commerce by poverty and sex, she still managed to be more educated than many of the men she befriended and promoted. Many of the relationships we take for granted in Boston and Concord of the era can be directly linked to Elizabeth Peabody's tireless efforts to intellectually support interesting, creative individuals, make introductions, even find people jobs and students, housing, mentors - all while she is shut out and struggling to support her parents and five younger siblings while teaching herself Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Italian, Spanish. Also: teaching children and adults, writing articles, editing and publishing, and keeping up a lively correspondence with teachers, philosophers, artists, poets of the era. Her sisters Sophia and Mary are hardly less accomplished.
   
   And yet Megan Marshall always keeps things grounded. The sisters are always real people who display very normal sibling rivalries manifested in jealousy, competition, ambition, despair, frustration and anger. There was also commitment, love, affection, support, delight and generosity.
   
   What is most amazing is the strength of the women in this group. They are creative, adaptable, intelligent, extraordinary in many ways. They are continually held back by the convention of the time that women were somehow frail and that ambition and accomplishment were unseemly in the "fairer sex." Considering what hothouse flowers many of the men in this group proved to be, it's all the more unreasonable that the inequality of the sexes persisted.
   
   Megan Marshall never harangues - the rant is purely my own. Marshall simply gives us the benefit of her prodigious research in the most straightforward and appealing manner. Don't be scared off by the length of the book: the last 100 pages or so are notes and index. The book itself speeds by and the reader is left at the point when the sisters are taking up their own separate lives.



4. Somehow I overlooked this book when it was released, but thank goodness I discovered it later. The author takes readers back in time to share the amazing lives of these sisters. In the process, acquaintances of the Peabody family, that readers already know as historical figures, are brought to life as real, flawed but remarkable people. Readers will identify with these women as they strive to achieve and practice their own talents in a society that shares possibilities and limitations not so different from our own.



5. I only get to read on the train to and from work. This book makes my daily trip a real treat. I'm only half through, but hooked from page one. Not only does Marshall make a fascinating biographical and historical account of the Peabody sisters, but she provides answers as to why strong, ambitious, smart women have been so frustrated for so long. Society supressed gifted women in the 1800's so much so that women either became outcasts because they had to find expression, which in itself was restricted to motherhood, housewife or teacher, or they retreated into themselves in the form of illness or depression. Indeed, the contributions to romanticism by the Peabody sisters came at a very high cost to them. And now I can read about them and think "How strange that society was so close-minded back then!"

5 comments about Grant and Lee: A Study in Personality and Generalship.

1. There are so many books on this subject that it's easy to start a fight from any point of view. Fuller is writing from across the Atlantic, and I believe that has given him a perspective that makes for a clear study of the two men. Fuller makes good use of Freemantle's observations from the latter's time in the Confederacy, extending observations into well reasoned analysis. This one is worth reading.



2. Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, published in 1932, compares quite favorably in its detailed research and readability with works by modern writers and historians like Shelby Foote, James M. McPherson, Gary W. Gallagher, and Stephen W. Sears. This work by Major General J. F. C. Fuller is notable for directly challenging the conventional wisdom that Grant was little more than a "butcher" and that his eventual success was almost entirely due to the North's larger population and more abundant resources. In Fuller's view Grant was not only the greatest general of the Civil War, but ranks among the greatest strategists of any age. Fuller generated even more controversy with his contention that Robert E. Lee in several respects had major failings as a military leader.
   
   Controversial or not, Major General J. F. C. Fuller was no ordinary soldier writing about the Civil War. Fuller was a highly respected British military strategist and noted author. In the 1920s he collaborated with B. H. Liddell Hart in developing new ideas for the mechanization of armies. Ironically, their recommendations were more readily adopted in Germany than in Britain, France, or the U.S.
   
   Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, is a relatively short book, around 300 pages. Fuller writes with clarity and precision. He makes careful use of firsthand accounts; he paid particular attention to opinions of staff officers, as men in these roles were likely to have gained greater insight into the personalities of Grant and Lee. He also utilized the opinions of foreign witnesses of the war, like Colonel Fremantle, as a check on insiders' observations. His sources were identified through extensive end notes as he realized that his findings would be controversial. He includes statistics on battle losses to illustrate that the persistent belief that Grant's losses were abnormally high is simply a myth, and that Lee's percentage losses were actually higher.
   
   There are many exceptionally good books on the Civil War, but there are few that are as readable as Fuller's Grant and Lee, and offer such a fresh viewpoint (albeit, now nearly 75 years old, but one that remains stimulating and thought provoking). Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, is available in a reprint edition (1982) by Indiana University Press. Five stars.



3. Whatever your view of Robert E. Lee and U.S. Grant, Fuller's book will challenge you to think long and hard about your beliefs concerning both generals.
   
   As a Southerner, I have to admit that Fuller makes a compelling case for Grant being the better general between the two. One instance is where he confronts the idea that Grant was a butcher because of the heavy casualties during the Wilderness-Spotsylvania Campaign. While Grant indeed suffered the heavier losses, the percentage of losses was acutally lower than Lee. In fact, this was a common occurence in many battles in which Grant commanded.
   
   The book's contents are as follows:
   
   1. The Two Causes - the two nations, presidents, armies and other North/South factors both generals had to operate within.
   2. The Personality of Grant - modesty, common sense, courage.
   3. The Personality of Lee - humility, tact, audacity.
   4. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1861-1862 - description of the battles fought by both generals during both years (Shiloh, Fort Donelson, Antietam, Fredericksburg, etc).
   5. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1863 - Vicksburg, Gettsyburg, Chattanooga, Chancellorsville.
   6. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1864-1864 - Spotsylvania, Wilderness, Cold Harbor, Petersburg, Appamattox.
   7. The Two Generals - comparison and contrast between their two styles and personalities.
   
   One other interesting point mentioned by Fuller was perhaps making the Confederate capital in Atlanta instead of Richmond. I have often thought how such a move would have affected the fighting in Virginia, Georgia, and my home state of North Carolina. Something interesting to ponder!
   
   I highly recommend the book. Read and enjoy.



4. If you read the introduction to this book, you will understand that Fuller has set out to write a brief but direct book on the Generalship capabilities of Grant and Lee. In the introduction, Fuller notes that Henderson's classic book on Jackson is more a romantic study than one that is an objective view. He goes further to say that a full study of Jackson gives a different appreciation. A respect for his maneuvering and desire to fight but also his idiosyncrasies and secrecy that Fuller indicates would cause one to question Jackson's sanity. With that introduction, you are prepared for the author's blunt assessment of both Generals. The book is brief concentrating more on strategy than just battlefield tactics. He concentrates on the critical battles of the war and the general effect the war has as a whole not just the eastern theater. In Lee, he notes that he was not a grand strategist but one that fought with intuition. As a General, he excelled on fighting on the defensive as showed in the final campaign. However, Lee preferred fighting aggressively and his errors show at Gettysburg and Malvern Hill. In the case of Chancellorsville, Fuller notes that Lee should have used the wilderness more often as a greater asset for defensive maneuvers instead of coming out in the open into battle. That like a spider, he should have waited for opportunities to attack and withdrawal with the protection of cover. He further indicates that Lee had a poor operating staff and his administration impaired supply and clarity of orders as all were given verbally and minimally. Grant on the other hand was a former quartermaster, was well organized and had a global plan of the war hence his simultaneous operations with the western theater and his multiple prong attacks in the east. Fuller notes that at first his objective was to follow Lee and not concentrate on the Richmond. But later he changed to maneuver so that Lee had to react to him as opposed to the reverse. Grant was often accused of having little imagination but as Fuller notes, he did not have the imagination to inflate numbers that were against him (McClellan) but he was rational in knowing that the Confederates had limited manpower. Through his intuition, Lee had success against the earlier Union generals but as Fuller points out, he could not fathom Grant.
   
   The book is critical of both; however, as an overall commander, Grant comes across as much more able and Lee a totally different commander highly capable on the defensive but not as much a hands on commander as most would previously think. Both men are stripped bare; the author offers a unique unbiased view of the war without the human frailty of sentiment.



5. This is a small book, but don't judge it by its size. It is a great little book. Grant & Lee, with such different backgrounds, lead two great armies in the strangest of times. In the end, with no grudge, the two men get to know and respect each other. But the story of how these men fought & how they thought so similarly in the battlefield and how they were both so noble and courageous help show that two men that could not have been more dissimilar, ended up being so alike serving their causes. I highly recommend this book. Very entertaining, and very educational.

3 comments about Billy Mitchell: Crusader for Air Power (Midland Books: No. 180).

1. The book was pretty much what I expected, but there were some bits of information that I had never read before.



2. "Billy Mitchell: Crusader For Air Power" by Alfred F. Hurley (Professor of History, University of North Texas, publisher of `Air Power History, and a retired USAF Brigadier General) is the biography of the pioneer aviation visionary Billy Mitchell (1879-1936) whose contributions to modern military develop simply cannot be underestimated. The subject of a court-martial in 1925, Brigadier General William `Billy' Mitchell has been celebrated in books, film and television before. But Alfred Hurley's biography of this influential general goes beyond the more sensational aspects of a controversial military career to provide a fuller and more complete picture of the man who dropped out of college in 1898 at the age of 18 to enlist in a volunteer regiment of the army and fight against Spanish forces in the liberation of Cuba, was an avid horseman and hunter, and became the youngest Army captain at the age of 24, and the youngest member of the General Staff at the age of 32. Enhanced with the inclusion of an appendix, notes, bibliography, index, and historic photos, "Billy Mitchell: Crusader For Air Power" is an impressive and strongly recommended addition to community and academic library Military History, Aviation History, and American Biography collections.



3. As an Air Force officer, I read this book because I wanted to learn more about Billy Mitchell and also because it was on the Air Force Chief of Staff recommended reading list.
   
   The book fulfilled my expectations of being a very good introduction to Mitchell and it heightened my appreciation for this amazing airpower visionary. I only gave it 4 stars because it was at times difficult to follow and not exactly a "page-turner." It was, however, very short (less than 200 pages) and thus a fairly quick read.
   
   Before reading this book I didn't know much about Billy Mitchell except that he was old enough to have been around since before there were airplanes and the fact that he was court-martialed. After reading this book, I learned the following on this remarkable airpower pioneer (all of this was amazingly done in the early to mid 1920's):
   
   1. Since World War I, he pushed for a separate Air Force to operate under a new Department of Defense, which he also pushed for. He wanted the Air Force, Army and Navy to all have equal footing under this yet non-existent DoD. This he pushed very hard and was what eventually got him court-marshaled.
   
   2. He was the first one to stress the importance of airpower in future conflicts and basically said that whoever had air superiority would also control the ground.
   
   3. He mentioned having 60% of the force as fighters to gain and maintain air supremacy, 20% strategic bombers, and 20% recon planes.
   
   4. He wrote doctrines on strategic bombardment and stressed, as his Italian counterpart Giulio Douhet originally did, that air forces must target the enemy's vital centers and their capabilities to wage war - factories, fuel, railroads, headquarters, ammo dumps, etc. This went against the early uses and thoughts on airpower - to be used to attack enemy frontline forces only.
   
   5. He foresaw the importance of aircraft carriers and the role they would play in the next conflict.
   
   6. He visited Japan and reported that war with Japan was inevitable. He also posited that the Japanese would attack the US from aircraft carriers and would hit Wake Island, the Philippines, and then finally the islands of Hawaii.
   
   7. He visited Germany and reported back that the Germans were still "militaristic" and that war with Germany was inevitable in the next decade or two. He noted the Germans heavy investment and interest in aviation and foresaw the usage of airpower in the coming Blitzkrieg.
   
   8. He was one of the first to realize the strategic importance of Alaska as a future US state due to it's proximity to Russia, Japan, and the other Pacific islands. He proposed stationing strategic bombers and fighters there - a vision that would be fulfilled in the Cold War. The same can be said for Mitchell's recognition of Guam as a strategic staging island for US bombers.
   
   Nearly all of his predictions would come eerily true in the decade or two after his death in 1936.
   
   The author also handled the court-marshal in a balanced way, in my opinion. He conveyed to the reader that although Mitchell's ideas were revolutionary, and ultimately mostly correct, the means he used to get his point across were less than professional.
   
   Overall, a good read for anyone interested in the origins and development of airpower.

5 comments about The Killing of Reinhard Heydrich: The SS 'Butcher of Prague'.

1. Callum Macdonald is a historian at the University of Warwick in England. This 248 page biography of Reinhard Heydrich tells of his early life and the actions that determined his career first as a Naval officer then as one of the high-ranking Nazi officials. Imperial Germany was an aristocracy where class prejudice prevented recognition of those who acquired material prerequisites (p.6). There was bias against the Heydrich family for the wrong reasons. A charge of "breach of promise" caused Reinhard's discharge from the Navy (p.15). He found a new career in Himmler's SS (p.16). The SS investigated people in the Nazi party and their enemies (p.17). Reinhard was picked to organize the Security Division (p.18). His skills, talent, and ambition made his career (p.20). Reinhard hated the old imperial Germany: officer corps, bureaucracy, and churches (p.21).
   
   After Hitler was given power the SS sought to control the police, especially the political police. Each province (or state) controlled its police force (p.23). When the Enabling Act gave total power to Hitler the takeover of state governments began (p.24). The unrestrained administrative terror began, leaders of political parties and trade unions, and Jews, were put into the new detention camp at Dachau (p.25). The next victim was the SA; the German officer corps wanted them eliminated. Himmler's SS purged their rivals (p.27). The mission of the SS was the internal defense of Germany, a never-ending task (p.28). Reinhard considered Catholics as a danger (p.30). He planned to destroy the Church from within (p.31). Reinhard had a "bad reputation" among prostitutes (p.44).
   
   Chapter 3 provides an important history of Czecho-Slovakia during the late 1930s. After Munich the Czech military intelligence bureau fled to England with their secrets (Chapter 4). Their information was important to Britain and the Soviet Union. The Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union meant the repudiation of the Munich pact and hope for an independent Czecho-Slovakia (Chapter 5). But there would have to be resistance and sabotage by the Czechs to aid the war effort. Political intrigue put Reinhard in charge of Bohemia-Moravia (Chapter 6). Repression followed against the resistance (p.113). Rations were increased (p.114). But Reinhard had one weakness: he avoided the usual security escort (p.117). This made him an accessible target (p.118).
   
   Heydrich organized the economy to improve war production (pp.132-133). Propaganda aimed to control thinking (p.135). Chapter 7 tells of the return of the parachutists to Czechoslovakia. The preparations and the discussions on the politics are in Chapter 8. It was almost like luck that the team was given an opportunity on May 27, 1942. The wounds of Heydrich proved fatal (Chapter 9). Reprisals were taken, the village of Lidice was razed and its population destroyed (p.187). Then an amnesty and a reward resulted in a letter that named the two men (p.189). No parachutist was taken alive (p.195). More reprisals followed, over 5,000 victims (p.199). Heydrich's death was the only good news in Europe for the Allies. Britain repudiated the Munich agreement and recognized the Benes government (p.200). Sudeten Germans would be later expelled (p.201). The Nazi leaders would face future retribution (p.203). The murder of over 50,000 Czechs halted resistance until 1944 (p.205). Their relative isolation was different from France and the countries nearer England.



2. The Killing of Reinhard Heydrich by Callum MacDonald is the best account in English of the assassination of Heydrich that I'm aware of. It presents background on Heydrich's life before he became the "Reichsprotector" of Bohemia and Moravia in late 1941. It continues with fine chapters on the development of the Czech plans to assassinate Heydrich, the assassination, and the German reprisals. For me, it communicates very well the harsh drama of these events.
   
   One matter I would like to understand better is the apparent lack of an escape plan on the part of the two parachutists who carried out the assassination. A chapter in Prague in Danger by Peter Demetz, to be published in early 2008, may provide new information on this matter.
   
   The comment of a Czech friend may be a suitable ending to this brief review: "The question as to whether the assassination was justified, given the brutal German reprisals, may never be settled. What remains is the courage of the parachutists and those who helped them, and the murderous folly of men."



3. Very detailed and thorough with a good overview of the events leading to the assassination. Too repetitious of the political motivations of Benes, et al in London. Terminology is confusing for the reader new to this material, but helpful index in the back to all the abbreviations. Overall very interesting read. To those traveling to Prague the church crypt is open to the public for a small fee with small museum and self-guided tour, complete with machine gun bullet holes on outside of church.



4. If there was ever a face of evil, then it had to be Reinhard Heydrich and Adolf Hitler. Hitler once said about Heydrich that he had a heart of iron. Reinhard was sadistic and was the architect of the Final Solution. This was no man with a humane touch, he was in short a monster. The Czech government in exile and the British sent this man to where he belonged at a terrible cost.
   The book details the plot to kill Heydrich. Surprisely, the murder and details took up perhaps three to four chapters, with the rest of the book dealing with internal Czech politics and how the government balanced between the English and Soviets. There was some good information on the wartime policies of Bohemia and Moravia (Czech Republic) and the government in exile under Benes in England.
   The world was a better place without Heydrich. A short biography is included in the writing, and it shows Heydrich in all his bloody lust. His own killing was because he had so much contempt for the Czechs. He and his driver were the only ones on the road, and the killers had a big target, especially when Heydrich told the driver to stop when he saw the guerillas. This was truly an evil man.
   The book is a nice read. It details the bio of Reinhard, plus the detail of plot and murder, and finally the end of those who killed Heydrich. A good book.



5. Reinhard Heydrich was a horrible Nazi. Tall. Blonde. Amoral.A killer whose convening of the Wannssee Conference in early 1942 began the implementation of the plan to destroy European Jewry;
   the Butcher Boy of Czechoslovakia who ruled from a castle in
   Prague. This repulsive human being was assassinated in May,
   1942 by daring Czech patriots who attacked his car with a bomb
   and a sten gun!
   Reprisals following Heydrich's death were horrific leading
   to mass arrests and the wiping off the map of the village of
   Lidice.
   The brave men who plotted the murder of Heydrich were martyrs to Czech freedom whose names as sons of liberty should never be forgotten.
   The late author Macdonald examines how the assassination was planned among Czech exiles in London; the politcal and strategic repercussions of the assassination and the fate of the families of those responsible for the assassination are reported.
   The book would make a marvelous thriller espionage motion picture with its picture of parachutists landing in occupied
   Czech,; daring escapes; the final showdown to the death in a large Prague church and the daring daytime attack on Hedyrich's
   car.
   In the unholy pantheon of Nazi monsters the name of Heydrich is today little known among the general public. This chief lt. to Himmler is however emblematic of the Nordic evil incarnate of fascism.
   This book will prove interesting to the World War II buff and
   the general reader interested in the period. Good!

3 comments about The Twenty-Five Year Century: A South Vietnamese General Remembers the Indochina War to the Fall of Saigon.

1. HAHAHAHHAA What a funny sub-teacher; Mr. Lam is a fierce general, althought he broke the necks of evil vietcongs, he prefers shooting them up with a machine gun.



2. I bought this book because I was intrigued by the prospect of reading a memoir from the point of view of a South Vietnamese soldier. Although Gen. Lam Quang Thi was a very high-ranking member of the ARVN (Army of the Republic of Vietnam) and attained high rank at a young age, I got the impression that he was one of the truly gifted officers in that army, who was idealistic about serving his country to the best of his abilities.

   Throughout the book, Thi regularly takes issue with the corruption and incompetence of many of his fellow officers, and recounts the political situation in the South, where coup after coup after coup left the country of South Vietnam basically a rudderless ship. He tells of how many of his fellow officers attained high ranks, up to and including senior generals, not because of superior soldiering prowess, but because of having the right political connections. Even he (the author) benefitted a little from the political machinations of some of his superiors. In this regard, the book is an excellent source on the socio-political scene in Saigon in the 1960's.

   However, as a war memoir, I found the book a little light in descriptions of battle and how he and the men under his command coped with the strain of combat. This is why I give the book only four stars. I suppose that as a general, his viewpoints of battle tend to be more detached and "big picture" oriented, which is reflected in his writing. Most descriptions of battles his units fought were mostly like, "We swept the area with the 1st regiment, while the 2nd was held in reserve. After heavy contact, we suffered 25 dead while the VC suffered 100 dead." None of the harrowing descriptions which can be found in many other terrific war memoirs are present here. Since so many of those other types of books have been written by American soldiers, with American perspectives, I was excited to finally be able to read one written from an Asian soldier's perspective. However, I was somewhat disappointed in this regard. All in all, however, I feel that this is a book that most Vietnam War buffs should read.




3. General Thi shares with us the major events of his life, from losing his father at an early age to the Viet Minh, to how his Uncles and Aunts were so instrumental in providing the Extended Family (Confucian) Values that enabled Lam and his brother to pull themselves up by their hard work and many accomplishments in school and later in their adult life.

   We see through Lam's eyes the French Occupation of Vietnam, the reasons for the Viet Minh, the Fall of the French, the coming of the Americans, Lam's Army Career and how he so skillfully plays the hand Life has given him, making the best of what he has, leading all the way to making ARVN Lt. General (Three Star General) at such an early age through his sheer abilities and hard work.

   The book also allows the Reader to see and experience Vietnamese Culture, from Tet (Chinese New Year), the tasty foods (I still can smell the Cha Gio) cooked in celebration of their various Holidays and Occations, to Confucian Extended Family Values of Respect for Elders and a High Premium on Education as the way to get ahead in Life, and how even later on in their lives when he outranks his Older Brother (who was "only" a Two Star General) that Older Brother still made the Final Decision and was obeyed when it came to Family Matters.

   For those of you who did not know, Vietnamese Wives and Mothers, while seemingly docile and obedient, were actually Very Powerful when it came to Family Matters of Finance and Children. Vietnamese Family Values were demonstrated as we watch Lam and his Family when they get to visit with Emperor Bao Dai's Mother, and her demonstrated tenderness towards Children.

   An excellent example of what one Vietnamese Life was like from 1950 to 1975, and HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

2 comments about Stonewall Jackson (Great Generals).

1. Stonewall Jackson by Donald A. Davis
   (Palgrave Macmillan (2007), Hardcover, 224 pages)
   
   A review
   by
   Colin J. Edwards
   
   Stonewall or Oddball?
   
   I have to come clean immediately and confess that I have difficulty with the description, `tough fighting generals'. What they are describing are heartless individuals who send men to death or mutilation with reckless abandon. Let us remind ourselves that wars are started by politicians, fought by generals and won by soldiers. The American Civil War was the exception: the generals prolonged that one.
   Before you cast me aside as a peace-nik lefty, let me assure you that I saw action as an infantry officer, and know a little of what I speak.
   
   Books about wars: and this is a book about a war more than a biography of an individual, are either from an officer's perspective, or the enlisted man. Donald Davis is the exception being quite at home writing about either. His best seller `Lightening Strike', records the active service of a gunnery sergeant. However, I could find little sympathy for the fighting man in this volume. Mr Davis wrote with touching tenderness of the separation of General Jackson from his wife and new baby girl. A separation that didn't last long as the general called them to his side. Tens of thousands of ordinary soldiers from North and South would have thought precious, just a moment with their loved ones. Rank has its privilege it seems.
   
   Davis' detailed descriptions of the various battles are excellent, if a little tedious. This is due perhaps to a lack of information about Jackson who was such a secretive individual, that it's a wonder Davis was able to write the book at all.
   
   Born at Clarksburg West Virginia on January 21 1824 into an attorney's family, he preceded by four months another general and West Point chum who saw the light of day at Liberty Indiana in May: a future adversary, Ambrose Burnside.
   
   After a very unsettled childhood, he entered West Point more by luck than judgement. He struggled to keep up but had an almost eccentric ability to focus unswervingly on the subject at hand. This paid off and he was able to move up the rankings graduating 17th out of a class of 59. This was not good enough to get him into the esteemed engineers, but it did get him into the artillery as a second lieutenant. This single minded eccentricity bordering on autism became more apparent when he was under fire during the Mexican Way. Observation of his reckless valour caused him to be bumped up the ranks to acting major. Another manifestation of his disturbed mental state was his inability to work in harmony with others. His unresolved dispute with a brother officer while stationed at Fort Mead in Florida, resulted in him leaving the army and taking up a teaching post at Lexington Virginia.
   
   The general consensus was that Thomas Jackson was a poor teacher, but the eight years there gave him the opportunity to meet and marry two wives.
   
   The Civil War found him back in the army and up to his neck in muck and bullets in the battles so precisely delineated by Mr Davis. His eccentricity (or mental disturbance), new no bounds and he and his soldiers went from victory to victory even if it killed them. He even had one of his generals (A.P.Hill), dragged along behind a cart on an interminable march for some undisclosed actus reus. This so damaged the general's tender feet that he was out of action for some time. Not the action of a sound mind you might think; particularly when it concerns one of your better generals.
   
   Jackson continued to carry the whole war on his shoulders, confiding in no one until he experienced a nervous collapse. From then until the end of his life he was conspicuous for his ability to fall asleep anywhere. On one occasion he was summoned to see his boss Robert E Lee, and promptly fell asleep before he saw him.
   
   Thomas Jackson was a religious zealot who spoke more to God than anyone else. However, he did not practice what he preached, nor anything anyone else preached as he didn't stay awake long enough. He had no compunction in raking artillery fire into Mexican civilians when Mexico City failed to surrender in 1848, or later when he gunned down a retreating Mexican army. During the Civil War he showed no reluctance to destroy fellow Americans be them from the North or the South, and insisted that his officers do likewise.
   
   To experience fear while in the presence of danger is normal. To some extent it is possible to hide that fear. Jackson did not hide it; he did not have any fear. He constantly took needless risks and in front of his troops defied the conflagration to kill him.
   That was until Chancellorsville on May 2 1863. Throwing caution to the wind as usual, he took his staff beyond his own front lines to reconnoitre the enemy positions. True to form he omitted to inform anyone of his intentions. Upon his return he was fired upon by his own soldiers and hit three times. Six of his staff were killed outright. He however was not killed but was stretchered to an aid station falling off the stretcher on the way. The chief surgeon of Jackson's army, Dr Hunter McGuire, amputated his left arm, but did not notice General Jackson complaining about chest pain. The pain developed into pneumonia from which he died on May 10th 1863.
   
   Google Books list over 4000 entries for General Jackson, and most of them suggest that had he lived the result at Gettysburg would have been different. The generals lost the battle for the Confederates by their bickering and lack of direction. Jackson would have only added to the confusion. The soldiers of the South fought their hearts out at Gettysburg only to be betrayed by their officers.
   
   Donald Davis's book is a myth breaker, and a `must read' for anyone who has an interest in the first modern war.
   
   
   



2. I thought this book provided a succinct and accurate assessment of General Jackson's life and career. I do, however, offer three criticisms.
   
   First, a few maps would have been most helpful. The author presumes that the reader has a working knowledge of Jackson's major battles--the places they were fought, the strategy and tactics employed, and the surrounding topography. I realize that the Great General Series must make certain accommodations in order to accomplish its goal of providing a BRIEF overview of the life and service of its subjects, but a few maps would have greatly enhanced my understanding of what Jackson accomplished.
   
   Second, I thought the comparisons between Jackson's strategy and tactics and those employed in the Iraq War were both gratuitous and a bit of stretch, a not-so-veiled attempt to make the Civil War seem somehow relevant to the conflict in the Middle East.
   
   Third, the editors should have read the text one more time before it went to print. There were several typographical and formatting errors that were a bit of a distraction.
   
   These, however, are minor complaints. If you don't know much about Stonewall and want to get a feel for the contribution he made to the Confederacy and towards the evolution of military tactics, you would do well to read this book.

1 comments about Inkpaduta: Dakota Leader.

1. Today it is quite common to consider Inkpaduta "a caricature of evil on the level of a comic book villain, void of any decent values or virtues", as Dr. Paul Beck states. I agree. It is how I've always pictured this mysterious figure from the American West. I was taken completely by surprise while reading Dr. Beck's new and most extensive biography about Inkpaduta, "Inkpaduta: Dakota Leader" ("Inkpaduta"). For the first time, Inkpaduta is revealed in realistic terms: a human being and not the devil incarnate. He was an American Indian respected by the white settlers who lived amongst Inkpaduta's people and traded goods between them. Dr. Beck also accurately portrays the enigma that Inkpaduta became when he writes with stark clarity the horrible acts of killing woman and children at Spirit Lake and Springfield.
   
   Dr. Beck, an academic historian, researched his subject for years. His due diligence led him down a completely unexpected path. Primary accounts in the form of letters, diaries, and military official reports demonstrate for the first time that Inkpaduta and the white settlers in Iowa and Minnesota actually had good relations just prior to the Spirit Lake attacks. For the first time, a historian does not rely on second -and third - hand evidence and avoids repeating the same historical untruths about Inkpaduata. The result is an eye-opener. To some, these revelations might be controversial; to others they demonstrate why writers of history need to research properly in order to better serve the public.
   
   The opening act of "Inkpaduta" is a quick overview of the history of the different bands of the Dakota, their migrations, their governmental system, and geographical divides that aid the reader in fully understanding the events that follow. Dr. Beck does not linger long on this material and quickly moves his story through tribal warfare between the Dakotas and the Sac and Fox. Here, Dr. Beck begins to report the first of historical errors falsely portraying Inkpaduta negatively. The list of errors grows long, which begs one to ask how great and respected historians missed these errors before.
   
   Dr. Beck builds one case after another of Inkpaduta's positive and trusting relations with the white settlers wherever he lived. One case in particular involved Curtis Lamb, a farmer and trader (with the Dakotas), who lived in the Smithland, Iowa area in 1851. Inkpaduta's band would spend the cold winters camped near Lamb's farm. The Lambs lent Inkpaduta traps and traded furs while the Indian women supplied the Lamb family with firewood. When Lamb traveled to Council Bluffs to trade - which kept him from home for days - Lamb trusted Inkpaduta to protect his family. Inkpaduta did more than watch over them, he hunted and provided game to the Lamb family as well.
   
   Dr. Beck begins the second act by presenting the complex issues between whites and Indians concluding with the Spirit Lake Massacres. It is a common story: treaties signed by Indians to give up land, but it was never enough. Small conflicts erupted into major disasters. Dr. Beck clearly expresses how the positive relations between Inkpaduta and the whites deteriorated into death on the frontier. In our interview with Dr. Beck, he states how difficult it was for him to write about the Spirit Lake Massacres. It is hard and sad to read about them: women and children were brutally tortured and murdered.
   
   After the massacres, Inkpaduta's band fled to the west, but according to the newspapers, he never left. People were rightfully frightened after the word of the massacres began to spread; however, mass hysteria followed, and it can obviously be blamed on the media. Dr. Beck covers countless newspaper articles - some as far away as New York - to reveal the outright and completely false reports of raids and massacres that never happened. Of course, all of these reports blamed Inkpaduta. Inkpaduta became the devil incarnate, raping and killing practically anything that moved, according to every newspaper in the region and beyond.
   
   We are fortunate that it was Dr. Beck who sifted through these many accounts. A completely different book might have emerged in the hands of an amateur historian. Improperly filtering the newspaper reports and taking them as fact would result in a repeat of the same old tired stories and myths about Inkpaduta and inaccurate conclusions made.
   
   The third and final act has Inkpaduta leaving his homeland to travel farther and farther west to avoid capture or death by the authorities in Iowa and Minnesota. He eventually lived with the Hunkpapa. Dr. Beck briefly covers Inkpaduta's involvement in the Dakota War of 1862, the Punitive Expedition of 1863-64 against the Sioux, and the Sioux/Cheyenne War of 1876. On June 25, 1876 a very old Inkpaduta was living in Sitting Bull's village at the Little Bighorn when the 7th Cavalry attacked. It is not fully known whether Inkpaduta fought in the battle; at his age, if he did, it was strictly defensive. Inkpaduta eventually made his way to Canada where he lived the rest of his days; he never surrendered, nor was brought to justice for the Spirit Lake Massacres.
   
   Dr. Beck never attempts to excuse Inkpaduta or his warriors for the massacres, and it is impossible for any historian to fully explain why Inkpaduta decided to commit them. However, Dr. Beck - with due diligence - clearly demonstrates that Inkpaduta never hated whites up to the eve of the massacres; misunderstandings between the white and Indian cultures, beliefs, and different needs all contributed to Inkpaduta becoming a killer. Dr. Beck presents the evidence from all sides but allows the reader to make the final judgment. You can read an interview with Paul Beck on the Friends of the Little Bighorn Battlefield website.

5 comments about Some Survived: An Eyewitness Account of the Bataan Death March and the Men Who Lived Through It.

1. This book is a must-read. These guys literally went through hell. You must get this book, it is outsading. If you feel terrible about how your life is, read this book. You'll realize how good you have it.
   
   Well written book. Hard to put down.



2. I am reviewing the 1984 hardback edition of this book which was entitled "Some Survived. An Epic Account of Japanese Captivity During WWII."
   Although this is not the first book on The Death March I have read, it is probably the best. It is well written and easy to read. The thing I liked best was the fact that not only did it give, in great detail, an eye witness account of the atrocities committed by the Japanese on American POW's in the Phillipines, it went on to describe life in the camps after the march, then on to a very detailed description of their treatment on the 'Hell Ships' that took the prisoners to prison camps in Japan.
   This is not a book of despair only. It is also of faith, guts, determination, and final victory by Manny Lawton and a few others that survived this horrible period of time. It also prompts us to remember those that didn't. God Bless them.



3. This is one of those books that just makes you churn inside. The abuses and suffering are never ending during the length of the book. The detail provided could only have come from someone that was there. Mr. Lawton explains in vivid detail the degree of torment these guys endured. YOU NEED TO READ THIS!



4. On April 8, 1942, Manny Lawton was a 23 year old army captain stationed on Bataan when orders came down to surrender to the Japanese who had invaded and captured the Philippine Islands in the opening months of World War II in the Pacific Theatre. Lawton and his fellow U.S. troops and their Filipino allies were compelled to endure a six-day, sixty-mile trek forever after known as the Bataan Death March, during which approximately eleven thousand men died of exhaustion or were murdered by the Japanese by bayoneting, clubbing, or simply shooting their prisoners outright. By the time the war ended in August 1945, about 57 percent of the American troops who surrendered to the Japanese on Bataan had died in confinement at the hands of the enemy. Some Survived: An Eyewitness Account Of The Bataan Death March And The Men Who Lived Through It is an important historical documentation and seminal contribution to World War II Pacific Theatre reference collections.



5. This is an amazing report of an American soldier held captive by the Japaese in the Phippines and the island of Japan itself for three and one-half years after his capture in World War II.
   How he could remember the details of brutal beatings, starvation and resulting illnesses is almost beyond belief. His experiences with fellow prisoners runs the gamut from the highest heroism to utter selfishness. Every day he looked forward to freedom, only to be repeatedly disappointed until that memorable day when he met the invading U.S. forces and he knew that he was free ,atlast! The dscription of his home coming is heart wrenching as it was for all of us on our return. This book's contents are enough to make almost anyone swear to never buy another Japanese produced article.

   met h

5 comments about Last Chance For Victory: Robert E. Lee And The Gettysburg Campaign.

1. I'm giving this four stars for its entertainment value and an unqualified recommendation for any detail oriented civil war buff. Not because it is perfect but because like a lot of David Irving's stuff it examines historical events from a unique perspective and a slightly different point of view; offering a necessary balance to anyone who wants to objectively understand the events that took place.
   
   Bowden and Ward's study, "Last Chance for Victory," focuses almost exclusively on events and actions on the Confederate side of the Gettysburg campaign. The time saved by this limited focus allows them room for a host of analysis, speculation, and critical commentary. For the most part this is quite effective.
   
   It is quickly clear to readers that Bowden and Ward have an agenda, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. And they are often irreverent, brutally frank, and even sarcastic. For example, here is their description of Joe Johnston's mindset in Mississippi: "Despite his call to Pemberton for action, Johnston arrived in Jackson, Mississippi, just in time to do what came natural for him in the face of an aggressive enemy - retreat". At times, particularly when dismissing the opinions of other historians, this stuff gets a little whiny but is nonetheless entertaining reading.
   
   The central thesis of the book is summarized by Lee's description of his intentions at the start of the campaign: "I shall throw an overwhelming force on their advance, crush it, follow up the success, drive one corps back on another, and by successive repulses and surprises before they can concentrate create a panic and virtually destroy the army". The authors amplify this throughout the book with what they refer to as "Napolean's Maxims" such as: "The greatest disaster that can happen is when different corps of an army are attacked in detail, and before their junction". The reader is regularly reminded of Scott Bowden's Napoleonic expertise.
   
   My biggest criticism is a failure to apply the above thesis consistently. Bowden and Ward pontificate endlessly (yawn) about the nature of Lee's contradictory orders to Ewell the first day of the battle; i.e. not bring on a general engagement vs attack Cemetery Hill (including detailed semantic analysis of things like: if practicable...if possible...with discretion...discretionary). Which is generally irrelevant because had Ewell actually taken Cemetery Hill that day about all he would have gained were a few hundred prisoners from Orland Smith's Brigade of Howard's Corps (and maybe Howard himself). The rest of the broken First and Eleventh Corps would have been streaming south to the Pipe Creek Line in Maryland, where Meade planned to concentrate and fight Lee. Meade's July 1st order, known as the Pipe Creek Circular (also called the Pipe Creek Order), informed his corps commanders that the Pipe Creek Line would be the Union Army's line of defense and operations for the impending engagement, and that the Army of the Potomac was to concentrate there.
   
   So for Lee to "drive one corps back on another" he would first need to lure additional Union troops to the Gettysburg area. Driving the Federals from Cemetery Hill on July 1st would have ended any chance of doing this. Ewell might have gotten away with unobtrusively occuping portions of Culps Hill, but anything more tactically aggressive would have doomed Lee's overall strategic plan. Bowden and Ward completely ignore this consideration, which may or may not have occurred to Lee at the time but seems quite obvious now. And they further damage their credibility at the end of the book by citing Dick Ewell failure to pursue on July 1st as the second most important of the 17 (yawn again) reasons Lee was defeated at Gettysburg.
   
   And although the real strengths of the book are its chapters about the plans and the attacks of July 2nd, the authors again fail to adequately address three items as important to the events of that day as anything else; all examples of Lee's good and bad luck that day. 1. The gift from Dan Sickles when he placed his troops in a position they could not hope to defend. 2. New commander George Meade's impulsive mistake to support Sickles by the piecemeal feeding of Second and Fifth Corps units into a buzzsaw. 3. Meade's unexpected decision to strip his right of most of its strength.
   
   Meade should have positioned the Fifth Corps where Sickles was supposed to be, pulled Humphreys' Division back to the Cemetery Ridge line and had the rest of Sickles Corps fight a delaying action before pulling back to Houck's Ridge. He compounded Sickles imbecility and sacrificed two Corps instead of one. On the other hand, his panicked pulling of units from the Cemetery Ridge positions to reinforce his left crossed up Lee; who "correctly" viewed the union right as the most critical sector and believed demonstrations by Ewell against that portion of the line would insure that the Federal units there were unavailable for action elsewhere on the field. The fortunes of war.
   
   Otherwise the authors seem right on in their examination of the second day's fighting, crediting Lee's planning and Longstreet's execution for getting the army to a point where a decisive victory was a real possibility. And hanging most of the blame for coming up short on Anderson, Hill, and Ewell, plus the bad luck of losing Hood and Pender.
   
   Most important they put to rest the myth that Longstreet's desire to fight defensively impaired the execution of Lee's attack on the second day. Pointing out not just the legitimate nature of the delays but also how this provided time for Sickles to commit his huge blunder, which the First Corps was then able to fully exploit.
   
   The treatment of the third day of the battle is the weakest portion of this book; and the only area where I disagree with the author's defense of Lee. Insert ill-conceived and poorly executed. Fortunately it is the portion of the battle most understood by both casual and serious students of the engagement.
   
   And be advised that Bowden and Ward are often somewhat "imprecise" in their descriptions. For example they sum up the Battle of Brandy Station with: "Fleetwood Hill, the site of Stuart's Headquarters, witnessed especially heavy combat and changed hands several times". Although Fleetwood Hill was heavily contested in the very final stages of the battle, it was always occupied by Stuart's forces and was never actually taken by Gregg's troopers-who had been extremely late arrivals on the battlefield, taking the field six hours after Buford's Division had began the battle. Buford's troopers had been fighting "all day" over a mile east of Fleetwood Hill.
   
   Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.



2. Addition to my review made years ago...
   
   This is a modern classic, no doubt. Its strengths have been mentioned already by those of us who have taken time to carefully read it. So I'll just mention a couple of other things relevant to 2008.
   
   The more I study Bowden and Ward's book, the more I believe that the analysis alone is worth much more than its price, and is one of the reasons I consult it as often or more than any other book on the battle
   
   All in all, this is a well-deserving selection by the Chief of Staff Air Force in naming it to the 2008 Reading List. It should not be missed by any student of Robert E. Lee and of Gettysburg.



3. These two writers spend almost as much time criticizing other writers as they do giving their own opinion. In a nutshell, the book is yet another attempt to honor a commanding general who finally blew it after so many great battles. Lee had lost perspective on what his men were capable of by 1863. They got lucky at Chancellorsville because Hooker was scared of him, and Jackon was able to surprise the idiots in the 11th Corp. Instead of riding his lines at Gettysburg during the battles, he hid out in the seminary and watched the battle through binoculars rather than take control like Meade did. Every one of Lee's errors in judgement is blamed on someone else, rather than the commanding general who might as well have stayed in Virginia for all he was worth in PA. If you like excuses, you will like this book. These guys take shots at everyone including Coddington and Pfanz. Ever heard of these guys, no, but everyone knows Coddington and Pfanz. Guess why, their take on Gettysburg is way off unlike the real scholars of the battle. Pass on this one.



4. Gettysburg has its share of great books, and this is one of them, no question. Excellent scholarship and smooth narrative rounds out the authors' superb treatment of Lee by placing his decisions in their proper, historical context. As good as those aspects are, my favorite aspect of this book is the no-nonsense, hard-hitting analysis that gives real depth to Lee's generalship and its proper historical perspective. This is one of my very favorite works on American history.



5. I have read most of the reviews of this book and all are written so eloquently and with deep thought and meaning and fact based. I will get to the point. This book is a must. We can talk of Gettysburg until the cows come home and what if the scenerio to death. As a Woman with no children and never wanted children, I would have bore Lee 12 I loved him so much, but having said that. What a mess Gettysburg was. Yes you have to take into perspective the times and the comunication issues, or lack there of, but, in all reality, the fault I do believe does lie with the great one himself. Yes, I understand the vocabulary of the time, yes I understand that Lee was the epitome of what a true Southern Aristocrat consisted of, but just for a minute, try to imagine Nathan Bedford Forrest in that posistion. Do we really think that Nathan would have stated if at all practicable take that hill? Um,,NO. It would have just been take the damn hill. He would have been all over Longstreet as he delayed his assault. As much of a fan as I am of Longstreet, that was very questionable for me. And let us not forget my Louisiana Fightin Tigers who basically had the battle won the first day if yet they had the support that was needed.
   If Lee was indeed sick at the time, who will ever know. Almost everyone dropped the ball on this three day battle, wether intentional or not. As I make my pilgramige to Gettysburg yearly and I walk Picketts charge, this plan, how ever crazy it may have appeared to everyone else, I understood. To cut through the middle and they almost made it. Poor Fella's.
   Get this Book, it is great.