5 comments about Leonard Wood: Rough Rider, Surgeon, Architect of American Imperialism.

1. The name "Leonard Wood" appears in many places causing one to wonder who he was. Leonard Wood by Jack McCallum is a wonderful, interesting and informative book about a complex man who achieved great things despite significant flaws. The chapters on issues facing insurrection and establishment of self-sufficient governments in Cuba and in the Phillipines offer strong lessons for issues facing the United States foreign policy today. The impact of McCallums writing is detracted by the absence of any maps of the military campaigns or the areas where Wood governed. Given the extensive documentation and footnoting of this 355 page book, surely New York University could have spent a few more dollars to add pages with maps that would amplify McCallums wonderful analysis of Leonard Wood's life and accomplishments.



2. Leonard Wood: Rough Rider, Surgeon, and Architect of American Imperialism by Jack McCallum is slightly misnamed. General Wood was by no means THE architect of America's brief experiment with empire.
   
   General Wood was in many ways an interesting example of how to run an occupying government. Balancing force with progressive policies, he left Cuba and the Philippines healthier, wealthier, and better educated then when we found them. In that sense, he epitomized a brand of colonialism that was both uniquely American and truly revolutionary.
   
   Having grown up in northern Arkansas, it is challenging to say or write the name Leonard Wood without putting the word "Fort" in front of it. Thus, the installation in southern Missouri intended to honor the man has replaced him to those few who have even heard his name.
   
   General Wood was the son of an unlicensed medical doctor. He was part of the middle class by prestige, but not necessarily by income. A physician himself and having met the requirements for his internship, General Wood had left his training hospital under a bit of a cloud and therefore needed a way to support himself. The army became that window of opportunity. Unable to secure a commission in the medical corps, he hired on as a contract surgeon.
   
   Taking part in the last great campaign against the Indians, General Wood quickly distinguished himself as not only a surgeon but as a leader. His examples were not only the tough junior officers and non commissioned officers of the old west, but also Gen Crook and Gen Miles. From these two fathers, Gen Wood learns how to lead and, from Miles, how to thrive in the politically charged 19th century Army.
   
   Leaving the old west with a commission as a Captain in the medical corps, he accompanies Gen Miles to Washington and builds relationships to the leading republicans.
   
   When the Spanish-American War begins, General Wood becomes a Col in the volunteers leading the Rough Riders raised by his good friend Teddy Roosevelt. A combat promotion to Brigadier General soon follows. Shortly afterwards, General Wood earns his second star and becomes de facto ruler of Santiago and, later, all of Cuba.
   
   It is at this point, the biography becomes useful. While somewhat protected by the weaknesses in his judgment by legislative mandates, General Wood begins to craft a policy of governing that the current policy makers would have been wise to follow in current day Iraq.
   
   Not all of the lessons of this book are acceptable as those on military governance. General Wood is political, devious, and, at times, downright disloyal to his seniors. Yet, this perhaps only makes this a more realistic biography than other books that cover the same period.
   
   Sadly, General Wood has largely been forgotten by most students of history. His career covered a phenomenal period of change. General Wood's experience was shaped by the last veterans of the Civil War and he was the elderly mentor for the generation that fought World War II after his death.



3. Leonard Wood is forgotten today, but he was a formidable figure in his day and even came close to becoming President of the United States. He was an able administrator of both Cuba and the Philippines. One flaw in his administration was an authoritarian personality, who always did the right thing but tended not to listen to the people he was out to help.
   
   Interestingly, his story has a great deal of relevance today. It is far more important to succeed in Iraq and Afghanistan because as Europe becomes Islamicized, as it will within our lifetimes, the new majority will need a democratic model on which to base their governance. If they look at the Talibans and Saddams of an unreformed Middle East, then Europe will not be a pleasant place to visit, let alone live. If we can establish a tradition of democracy in even one or two Muslim countries, then we can embrace a Muslim Europe. We weren't out to democratize either Cuba or the Philippines in 1900 and we need to synthesize General Wood's great achievements with a democratic approach. I saw that being done in Afghanistan and I'm sure that that is happening in Iraq.
   
   This is a great story and a great book. It is badly in need of maps, however, and the author has a tendency, sometimes, of telling us rather than showing us the strengths and weaknesses of Leonard Wood. Nevertheless, it is an important book about a very contemporary subject.



4. For anyone who has read multiple volumes about Theodore Roosevelt, the name Leonard Wood has appeared many times. The more that I saw his name, the more I wanted to learn about the man but there was so little material available about him. Dr. McCallum has given us a well written and well researched book about one of this country's most visionary military leaders during an interesting period in our nation's history.
   
   The drawback, if there is one , to reading history is that you often times see the "warts" that existed on or about the subject matter and Leonard Wood certainly had his share of warts. However General Wood, in many ways, was exactly what our nation needed at this period in its development, a bridge from the old school line of military thought to what served as a template to a more modern army.
   
   Thanks Dr. McCallum. I needed this.



5. "Leonard Wood: Rough Rider, Surgeon, Architect of American Imperialism" by Dr. Jack McCallum should be considered a must read for any military leader or anyone in the field of foreign relations. The book is an outstanding biography - well researched and written. It's real strength is found in the story of Wood during the Spanish-American War and his enlightened administration of Cuba after the war. Here the book really shines. Sometimes the book bogs down in it's story of U S Army administration and politics in the early 20th century but that topic is central to the story of Wood's unique career from Surgeon to Soldier to Colonial Administrator to top soldier as Chief of Staff. I purchased my book for two reasons: I wanted to know more about the history of the U S Army during the period of Wood's service and my tremendous interest in all topics related to Theodore Roosevelt. It is in the latter area that the book is somewhat of a disappointment. While there are plenty of references to TR, there is much less on the relationship between the two and TR as a friend and personal confidante than I had anticipated. That aside, I enthusiastically recommend this book for anyone in leadership in the military, the Department of State, military historians and in particular those interested in the U S Army between the Indian Wars and World War I.
   
   George F. Franks, III
   Franks Consulting Group
   www.franksconsultinggroup.com
   http://consultingandcoaching.blogspot.com

5 comments about A Crisis In Confederate Command: Edmund Kirby Smith, Richard Taylor, And The Army Of The Trans-Mississippi.

1. The book is about the conflict between Kirby Smith, the Commander of the Confederate Trans Mississippi, and Richard Taylor, the Commander of the Confederate Army in Louisiana. Both learned their trade working with Stonewall Jackson before they were sent west. Kirby Smith wants to draw the Union Army into the interior and then concentrate his forces to defeat them. Taylor wants to attack quickly and defeat them before they can do any damage. This difference in vision leads finally to a complete breakdown in communication and trust between the two generals. The book was easy to follow. I was interested in the military aspects of the campaign, which were not covered because the author did not consider them as important to the conflict between Smith and Taylor. There were several maps that gave a good background for the campaigns. There were several battle maps, but only those battles where either Smith or Taylor was in command were included. Its outstanding feature is the study of Kirby Smith in command of a huge department and his inability to see the big picture outside the Arkansas Front. I would not recommend this book as an introduction to the Red River Campaign or the Civil War in Lousiana. It is an excellent study in command, demonstrating how the lack of trust can destroy military oppertunities.
   The South won this campaign because the Union forces also fell into a similar pattern of distrust between General Banks and Admiral Porter who did not cooperate and distrusted each other. They were also at the end of a long supply line and the water level was falling



2. The war between general officers can be as interesting as the war between the armies. Bragg's problems as commander of the Army of Tennessee with Polk and Hardee, Hood undercutting Johnston in 1864, the often-contentious HR problems of the Army of Northern Virginia, the Pope McClellan feud and Halleck maneuvering against Grant are well known. Each of these is the subject of books or devoted chapters in numerous histories of the war. The concentration on the war east of the Mississippi misses one of the worst feuds between generals during the war. Richard Taylor and Edmund Kirby Smith were both proud, competent men that were sure they knew what was best. After the fall of Vicksburg, the Trans-Mississippi became Kirby Smithdom. Isolated from the Confederacy, subject to conflicting demands and directives from Richmond that might be impossible these two men fought the Union Army and each other to a standstill. This is their story both during and after the war.
   
   Neither man seems to have had real warm feelings for the other. Taylor was responsible for Louisiana and reported to Smith who commanded the Trans-Mississippi. The author gives us a full and careful review of the two men, their war experiences and political support. This allows the reader to fully understand the root of the problems and appreciate the extant of their bitterness. Taylor's handling of CSA forces during the Red River Campaign is brilliant. He defeats a much larger combined arms force isolating each and almost destroying both. Smith may or may not have robbed Taylor of victory by removing troops to defeat an army advancing in Arkansas.
   
   This book assumes the reader knows very little and carefully explains the position of the parties, their options and the results of the choice made. This is one of the strongest parts of the book and keeps the reader fully informed, allowing us to make informed decisions. A second strong point is covering the post-war history of both men and how the story grew and changed. This is being done more often in better histories, is well handled and very valuable.
   
   Richmond is part of the problem and the shadowy presence over the Trans-Mississippi. The source of power, Smith and Taylor supporters battle there too. However, Richmond has an agenda that fully supports neither and causes problems for both. In the end, as was done elsewhere, Richmond refuses to support either side. This book is not an expose of the Confederate Departmental system but it shows all the problems this system caused and that Richmond refused to resolve.
   
   This is not an easy read but it is a worthwhile read. The author's words do not jump off the page, grab you and pull you in. They build a solid reliable narration that is full of information and is very logical. This is a book that those interested in the Trans-Mississippi and/or the Confederate high command should read.



3. First let me state that while this is, indeed, a wonderful book, it is NOT for the casual reader, nor is it meant to be the first book one ever reads about the Civil War. Most people know nothing of the war beyond Lee, Grant, and the fact that there was fighting in, and around, Virginia. If that's you, stop here.....There was a whole different theatre of operations called the Trans-Mississippi Department, commanded by a little known Floridian, General Edmund Kirby Smith. From his headquarters in Shreveport, LA, Smith oversaw Confederate operations in Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, and what is now Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Arizona. Didn't know the Civil War involved Oklahoma? It's quite a story, complete with the first American Indian General. Were there Confederate Mexicans? Sure were, some with high rank.
   
   General Smith was as much a Governor-General as he was a General, and he faced impossible conflicting demands from different parts of his domain. Part of his difficulty was that many of his senior leaders were Robert E. Lee's incompetent rejects. This book is mainly about Smith's problems with the one who was NOT incompetent, Lieutenant General Richard Taylor. Before the war, Taylor was a rich, high society Louisiana plantation owner. His father was President Zachary Taylor, and his sister was Jefferson Davis' late first wife. Taylor was a vain and unpleasant man, but a tough fighter. Smith and Taylor were like gasoline and fire. They were both loyal to the South, and wanted victory, but had fundamentally different views on how victory could best be won. Basically, Smith wanted to concentrate on Arkansas and Missouri, Taylor on Louisiana. Dick Taylor's Red River campaign was a masterpiece, but he blamed Smith for lack of the support needed to make his victory complete. Finally Taylor's insubordination went too far, and he was relieved. Had these two great men been able to cooperate, would the final outcome of the war been different? Who knows, but I doubt it. For all their problems, the Department lasted till the very end, and was the last to surrender. After the war, Taylor got into politics, and continued to sling mud at Smith until he died in 1879. Kirby Smith lived till 1893, the last full General to cross the river; he spent his last 18 years as mathematics professor at the University of the South, accorded the status of "grand old man" [ though he wasn't that "old"]. He maintained his bearing as a Christian gentleman, and never spoke out against Taylor, or anyone else. The whole business is a sad, but fascinating, chapter of the war.
   
   Jeff Prushankin has written a winner, fully deserving five stars. It is for the specialist, not the general reader [as my son says, for people like me] With that caveat in mind, if this is your cup of tea, get it and prepare to enjoy.



4. Compared to Civil War operations in Northern Virginia, comparatively little has been published regarding operations west of the Mississippi River. In this work, the author Jeffery Prushankin provides a comprehensive overview of the events in the Trans-Mississippi area as viewed by Department Commander General Edmund Kirby Smith and by his subordinate General Richard Taylor. The text offers an informative account of the antagonistic relationship between these two generals and the consequent military results.
   
   The text opens with a brief narrative of the backgrounds of the two generals. Taylor received a political commission as a colonel of the Ninth Louisiana Infantry. He was promoted to brigadier general and briefly served under General Stonewall Jackson. Under Jackson, Taylor adopted Jackson's philosophy that "The value of the initiative in war cannot be overstated" resulting in the tactical strategy that the best defense is a good offense. Kirby-Smith graduated from West Point in 1845 and served in the war in Mexico. In May 1861, he received an appointment as chief of staff to General Joseph F. Johnson. He learned from Johnson and adopted Johnson's tactical and strategic philosophies. The opposing tactical/strategic philosophies of Smith and Taylor, was one of the items contributing to the many confrontations between Smith and Taylor.
   
   As a brigadier general Smith was sent to command the Department of East Tennessee where he promptly repeated the mistake of his predecessor by concentrating on Arkansas."His propensity to favor the defensive often led to sluggish or ill-timed concentration that made his strategy ineffective." Taylor assigned to Louisiana, by October 1862 was operating as an independent command thereby setting the stage for confrontations.
   
   The text narrates how in 1863 with the mounting threat to Vicksburg and reduced Federal threat in central Louisiana, Smith chose a politically expedient path and ordered Taylor to strike the Federals west of the Mississippi. Their consequent failures along the Mississippi subsequently reflected badly on both Smith and Taylor and only added to the burgeoning dispute between Smith and Taylor. By mid-1863 Smith was not providing the type of leadership required in the Trans-Mississippi. Smith's failure to support Taylor lead to serious problems for the Confederates in 1864 and also resulted in additional serious problems between the generals.
   
   The text provides a brief account of the Red River campaign which Taylor executed receiving inconsistent support from Smith. Disobeying orders, on April 8, 1864, Taylor attached the Federal Army under General Banks at Mansfield, Louisiana, stopping the Federal advance. The next day Taylor fought and defeated Banks at Pleasant Hill after which the Federals began to retreat pursued by Taylor. Meanwhile, Smith following his Arkansas strategy didn't support Taylor and withdrew infantry and cavalry from Taylor for Smith's pursuit of Union General Steele back to Little Rock. Taylor pursued General Banks to Alexandria, but lacked the necessary manpower to defeat Banks; Banks ultimately escaped. Smith's campaign against Union General Steele resulted in victory at the battle of Jenkins' Ferry, but it did not "enhance the condition of the Confederacy in the Trans-Mississippi." The dispute between Smith and Taylor became quite bitter with Taylor blaming Smith for the escape of General Banks and the Federal Fleet under Admiral Porter.
   
   Taylor asked to be relieved from command. Smith removed Taylor from command on June 10, 1864. Amazingly, on July 18 Taylor was promoted to lieutenant general and was reassigned as commander of the Department of Alabama, Mississippi and East Louisiana. The author gives a short narration of Taylor's effort to cross the Mississippi and assume his new command together with a brief summary of his and Smith's activities to the end of the war. Smith surrendered in Galveston on June 2, 1865 while Taylor had surrendered May 6, 1865 at Citronelle, Alabama. After surrendering Taylor went to Washington to lobby for the release of Jefferson Davis after which he worked as a lobbyist for the Democratic Party and as an outspoken critic of the Ku Klux Klan. Smith traveled first to Mexico City where he was unwelcome, then traveled to Cuba eventually returning home.
   
   In 1879 Taylor published his memoir titled Destruction and Reconstruction which helped nurture the Lost Cause myth. In his memoir Taylor described Smith's policy as one of "sheer stupidity and pig-headed obstinacy...." His memoirs were relied on by countless former Confederates "for their own reminiscences of the war."
   
   Despite their acrimonious relationship, Smith and Taylor produced a great Confederate military accomplishment in the Red River campaign against a superior Union force. Unfortunately, Smith's cavalry raid on St. Louis resulted in little of military value.
   
   The reader of this book will find it a source of much information on an often neglected area of operations. It gives fascinating portraits of opposing strategies and personalities. With the Red River campaign a great Confederate accomplishment, one can only speculate on what would have been accomplished if Taylor and Smith had worked harmoniously together.



5. Okay, so I am biased. The author is a friend. But I read a LOT of history, and very little of it is nearly as well written.

5 comments about Psychic Warrior: Inside the Cia's Stargate Program : The True Story of a Soldier's Espionage and Awakening.

1. The author is good at circling around, will take you forever to get to the point, lengthy read, and waste of time. No practical facts.



2. I found the part about David's injured brain could actually benefit himself, atleast spiritually, crazy! it just makes you question what reality is. the only thing i wish this book had more of is how to do remote viewing and simply more RV sessions describing other worlds etc..



3. Very disappointing. The story of the actual work he did as a remote viewer was fascinating. The rest is dreck and casts doubt on the credibility of everything he writes.
   
   He plays the victim card with the Army, acting surprised that his superiors didn't want him to publicize details about his highly classified duties.
   
   The reader is left to wonder how much of his experience he distorts or omits. For example, he conveniently forgets to mention his apparently romantic relationship with a subordinate until it comes up in the investigation the Army conducts against him, then tries to justify it.
   
   He also is inconsistent. He writes about how unhappy he was in his assignment after Stargate, then about how he curses at the person who calls him out of the blue to offer him a job back at Stargate.
   
   He comes across as an undisciplined narcissist who sacrifices his career and family life for his own selfish gain. It is evident why he is an outcast in the military's remote viewing community.



4. This book is a waste of time, because all non-practical stories, and lack of facts. Very tiring reading.



5. I bought this for my husband for Christmas. He started the book and within a couple of days he was finished and concluded by saying YOU'VE GOTTA READ THIS ! Which he rarely recommends anything.

5 comments about A World Apart: Imprisonment in a Soviet Labor Camp During World War II.

1. This is a true story of the Gulag. Gustav Herling was arrested because he fled across an international boundary and the Russians suspected he was related to Hermann Goring. Of course this was crazy. At the time, Russia was allied with Germany, and Herling was fleeing the Nazis. His one and half years in a Gulag camp in the Artic north is featured in this story. He relates how prisoners were sapped of their energy and then died. The prominent theme was the hunger of the prisoners. They were slowly starved to death. Other stories relate the one or two days a year the prisoners were given off, the disgraced NKVD prisoners and their fate, and the cultural activities.
   
   This is an interesting read. This is not for the feint of heart. Murder, rape, hunger, and the loss of humanity were what happened in the camps. Herling portrays this vividly in this book. The book blasts the system of slave labor in the Soviet Union.



2. I first read The Gulag Archipelago when I was in middle school, and it left a lasting impression. What I hadn't realized was there were other authors who had written about the subject before Solzhenitsyn.
   
   Herling's book is a very readable introduction to life in the GULAG; he was a prisoner for eighteen months until he was released to work as part of the war effort. Told from a first-person perspective, it's not as detailed and doesn't present as many disparate views as The Gulag Archipelago but is still very interesting and enlightening.
   
   It's especially recommended if you're curious about the subject and don't have the patience or the time to work through Solzhenitsyn's works.



3. The imagery in the book is not for the faint of heart. Its a brutal book - a study of the human condition when devoid of hope, set against impossible odds, and where a temporary relief from the pain may turn out to be an insufferable shock.
   
   Its also a deeply moral book - that seeks to find answers to the most grotesque acts of depravity in the context of these acts... where a man's face cracking under the weight of boots may be the path to freedom.



4. Perhaps the best summary of this book comes from Bertrand Russell himself who wrote an introduction to the first English edition of "World Apart" in 1951: "Among the many books that I have read about experiences of the victims of the Soviet prisons and camps, the `World Apart' by Gustaw Herling impressed me the most and is best written. This book possesses very rarely seen power of simple and lively narrative and it is completely impossible to question anywhere his truthfulness."
   
   In spite of this testimony from one of the greatest intellectuals of the XX Century, the book did not enjoy much recognition for many years. Even today, more than half a century after its publication, this masterpiece still remains in relative obscurity, save the Herling's native Poland. It is an example of a thing done by "a wrong guy at the wrong time in the wrong place". Czeslaw Milosz explained that condition somewhat like this: After the war Gustaw Herling was known more for his service in the Polish Army of Wladyslaw Anders considered at the time, especially in France and Italy, as Fascist and the book was clearly anti-Soviet. At the same time the prevailing mood, especially among the left-leaning intellectuals was decisively pro-Soviet. After all the Soviet Union was an Ally who played decisive role in the defeat of the Nazi Germany.
   
   The true nature of the Soviet system was not fully revealed and acknowledged until the publication of Solzhenitsyn's "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" (1963) and, more importantly, "The Gulag Archipelago" (1974). Important as these works are, however, the testimony of Herling preceded them by more than a decade and it is the first, as far as I can tell, in depth account of the reality of Soviet system. Unfortunately the works by Solzhenitsyn did not do much good to redeeming this book's value. Perhaps, they even overshadowed it.
   
   The "World Apart" is an account of the real events that happened during Herling's "tenure" in the camps of Kargopole in the deep North of the Soviet Union. And the real were the people he wrote about. But this book is not merely an account of these unspeakable events. Herling goes much further. He offers his analysis of "what happened how and why". And he offers the portraits of people describing what can happen to a man under the conditions of extreme terror, cold, hunger and overwork. It is a warning to all those "homegrown moralists" who in the comforts of their secure existence in freedom feel in their rights to pass judgments on others regardless of circumstances they really know nothing about.
   
   However horrific were the events described and however terrible was what happened to and with the people in the camps the overall "climate", if you will, of this book is not altogether gloomy. While not concealing what happened with the inmates in terms of their own behavior, Gustaw Herling refrains very consistently from passing judgments on them. The inmates were ordinary people and their misery, including sometimes complete moral disintegration and loss of dignity, was inflicted upon them and they were the victims. One cannot demand impossible from others and cannot expect something he had not proven capable of delivering himself.
   
   But his judgment of the nature of the Soviet system itself is unmistakable and uncompromising. It is astonishing that even today while there is hardly any confusion as to the nature of the Nazism, there is still much ignorance, misunderstanding and under-appreciation for the evils of Communism, including it's most degraded Stalinist brand. "World Apart" by Gustaw Herling-Grudzinski fully deserves to be recognized as one of the most in-depth, original analysis of the nature of the Soviet system (and beyond) and is a genuine masterpiece of the literature of the XX Century. If there is a work that this book should be compared to it is Fyodor Dostoyevsky's "Notes from the Underground".



5. A World Apart is reminiscent of A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch. Where A Day in the Life... is defined by a mood of monotony and despair, A World Apart provides greater detail in the events defining the two year prison existence of Gustaw Herling.

   The book is beautifully written and completely unsentimental. There are no lessons in the power of the human spirit. It is the men who do not cling to hope who have a chance of survival. Hope means recognizing the obliqueness of the present situation. This knowledge is what brings despair and death.

   This is the most graphic account I have read of the gulags. Gustaw manages to step back from the events taking place and with out sentiment or condemnation report. Herling writes that inhumane conditions will change the behavior of those individuals affected. Some of the prisoners actions can be explained in light of this. Highly recommended.

1 comments about History of the 15th South Carolina Infantry A: 1861-1865.

1. Jim Clary's regimental history of the 15th South Carolina Infantry is by far one of the most outstanding modern unit histories in print.
   
   Jim spared no effort and expense in researching and producing a simply tremendous all-around product. As the Amazon product description states, the book is not short on covearge (600pp). But, whereas many older regimentals and some of the newer, more cursory works, focus highly on just a unit roster, Jim provides one of the finest unit combat narratives in a book of this type as well as an exhaustive roster.
   
   He misses absolutely nothing in the unit's history and writes that history with a flowing, yet detailed prose, using dozens of obscure and never-before-mined sources. Soldiers' letters, diaries, memoirs, service and unit records, newspaper articles, a plethora of rare photographs, and dozens of detailed battle maps grace these pages. It is, without doubt, one of the most prolific accumulations of unit data ever to come under one cover.
   
   But, don't let the size of the book or its great detail deter you in perusing this gem. The book is so well put together in format and narrative that it was not only an easy but highly enjoyable read. Not an easy accomplishment for a unit history.
   
   The 15th South Carolina belonged to Kershaw's famous 1st Corps brigade in the Army of Northern Virginia and, so, particpated in most of Robert E. Lee's operations. In addition, Kershaw's Brigade saw action in the Chickamauga and Eastern Tennessee Campaigns and in the war's last campaign in North Carolina. It is no boast, then, to say that the fighting Fifteenth saw almost all of the war east of the Appalachians. Very few unit histories can cover such a wide range of the war's experience.
   
   The edition I reviewed was the softcover, but I hear Jim is hoping to prepar a hardcover release as well. In whatever form you read this work, just READ it for sure; it is one Civil War book you cannot afford to pass by.
   
   Theodore C. Mahr
   
   ( author of "The Battle of Cedar Creek: Showdown in the Shenandoah: October 1-30, 1864;" former U.S. National Park Service Seasonal historian at Manassas and Fredericksburg NMP's and past book review contributor to "Blue & Gray Magazine" )

5 comments about Our Liberators: The Combat History of the 746th Tank Battalion during World War II - 2nd Edition.

1. I am the son of Captain William P Kennedy and want to express my appreciation of Mr. Blanchard in his detail and research level that he has done with this account of the actions of the men of the 746th Tank Battalion during World War II. My father passed away a few years before the first edition was published, but he had several discussion with Mr. Blanchard prior to his passing. I know that dad would have enjoyed this account of their efforts and it has certainly been very enlightening to me. Though my father rarely spoke of the war to us as children, I was privileged to have attended several 746th Reunions including the first one in 1974 at Wolf City High School in Texas. May all who cherish and strive to preserve and protect life with liberty and freedom never forget the price the men of the 746th gave unto this world. David L Kennedy



2. Our Liberators is an excellent road map to understanding what the 746th Tank Battalion role was in D-DAY History. In the Battalion's trek from Utah Beach on its way into Germany, the author provides a very clear understanding of the battles the 746th fought for the simpliest of WWII novices. The history is very detailed with pictures of the soldiers, maps, and chronology of events drawn from personal interviews and battalion records. A superb read!



3. Our Liberators is an excellent road map to understanding what the 746th Tank Battalion role was in D-DAY History. In the Battalion's trek from Utah Beach on its way into Germany, the author provides a very clear understanding of the battles the 746th fought for the simpliest of WWII novices. The history is very detailed with pictures of the soldiers, maps, and chronology of events drawn from personal interviews and battalion records. A superb read!



4. Good book, but lacking in maps and sketches (maybe a revision in the future). The authour covers the independent tank BN's in the ETO, ones normally ignored when compared to those in armored divisions. Interesting stuff. Lots of fascinating anecdotes.

   This should not be your first book on tank warfare in the ETO. If you have a good idea of how the fighting went, you will really love this. If you want a full history of tank combat in Europe then there are other books to get.

   Overall a valuable addition to any tanker's or armor enthusiast's library.

   Hopefully the author will consider a similar work on the Tank Destroyer battalions,the army tank battalions that served in the pacific, and the tank battalions that fought in Korea.




5. There are not many histories of separate tank battalions available, and "Our Liberators" is one of the few that takes the reader from activation to war's end. Mr. Blanchard hews closely to the official records of the 746th Tank Battalion, and you can find out what the battalion was doing on any given day. The volume provides previously unpublished photos of the battalion's personnel and equipment. Anyone interested in the blue-collar story of the infantry-support tankers will want this in his library.

No comments about Air Combat: A History of Fighter Pilots.

2 comments about The Stars Bear Witness.

1. "The Stars Bear Witness" is not only a devastating record of the annihilation of Polish Jewry, but also the story of a singularly fearless and principled man who had dedicated his life to the Jewish workers of Warsaw -- and, often, to all Polish Jews who required aid and protection. The book's introduction tells us that Goldstein, later known respectfully and affectionately as Comrade Bernard, joined the newly-created General Jewish Socialist Labor Union party--"Bund"--as early as age 16. By 17 he was helping to organize fur workers outside of Warsaw. Arrested and imprisoned numerous times for his political activity, he was exiled by the Tsarist authorities to Siberia when he was still in his early 20s. After the Russian revolution, he returned to Warsaw and became one of the most prominent figures in the Bund and in the trade-union movement. From the 1920s onward he functioned as the head of the Bund's self-defense and militia groups. These were employed first to defend against attacks by Communists, and later to defend against Polish ultra-nationalists and fascists (the Endeks and Falanga). When anti-Semitic sentiments escalated in Poland in the 1930s, Jews became the targets of discriminatory practices and violent attacks. "The Bund was the only organization to carry out an active fight against the anti-Semites" (p. 11). Sometimes they were assisted in these efforts by Polish Socialists, though most of the time "the Bund fought alone." In 1936, after a confrontation in the Warsaw streets, Goldstein was arrested by the Chief of the Security Police, Captain Runge. Called to account for himself, and threatened with incarceration in "the notorious Polish concentration camp, Kartuz Bereza," Goldstein is reported to have declared: "As long as you refuse to protect the Jewish people, I will do it. If I am to get Kartuz Bereza for that, go ahead and send me there." (p. 15)
   
   In "The Stars Bear Witness," Goldstein relates, in extraordinary detail, the destruction of the Jews of Warsaw, a community that numbered some 500,000 people. Much like Wladyslaw Szpilman in his Warsaw ghetto memoir, "The Pianist", Goldstein presents an unvarnished account of Jewish life during the war. He does not gloss over the unseemly and deplorable actions of particular members of the Jewish community, but he reserves his greatest opprobrium for the Nazis, their Ukrainian and "Lettish" accomplices, and for the considerable portion of the Polish population who, either actively or passively, abetted in the extermination of their Jewish fellow-citizens.
   
   As a memoirist, Goldstein possesses a humble style. He says little about himself and his own situation for the first quarter of the book. Instead, he focuses upon the events that affect the Warsaw Jews as a whole. When he distinguishes individuals, they are typically members of the community, many of them Bundists, who tried to ease the plights of their fellow-sufferers. Only after a great proportion of the ghetto Jews have been sent to their deaths in Treblinka, does Goldstein begin to reveal more about his own story. By this time, he is a hunted man. He finds himself, like every other Warsaw Jew, under a death sentence. For a period lasting several years, he is sheltered by a number of courageous Poles. And, remarkably, while in hiding, he somehow continues his organizational work for the Bund--communicating with other Jewish fugitives, the Polish underground, and doing whatever possible to help Warsaw's last surviving Jews. His is a tragic, moving, and astounding story.
   
   What it is not, I regret to say, is an absolution of the Polish populace, as suggested by the review on this site by Mr. Peczkis. Mr. Peczkis's review misrepresents Goldstein's book in a way that is truly shameful. Mr. Peczkis quotes selectively and insidiously from the book so as to deflect all reasonable blame away from the Poles--and, shockingly, he appears even to suggest that the Jews somehow deserved their gruesome fate. I quote from his review:
   
   The Polish suspicion of the leadership of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising being tainted by Communism finds implicit corroboration in Goldstein's following revealing comments: "On May Day, the ghetto fighters undertook a one-day `offensive'. In the evening they held a roll call of their decimated ranks and sang the `Internationale'." (p. 198). Elsewhere, Goldstein himself has no difficulty referring to Communists as his "good friends" (p. 277).
   
   What Mr. Peczkis attempts to do amounts to a desecration of the memory of the murdered Jews of Poland and also to that of Bernard Goldstein, whose heartbreaking book he perverts for his vile purpose. Goldstein wrote his book hewing to no partisan agenda, and it should be read in the same spirit.
   
   In the book, Goldstein makes it clear that no Jew could have survived in Warsaw without the help of a sympathetic and heroic Pole, but he also makes it clear that many other Jews would have survived if not for the actions of other Poles who--either for reasons of personal gain or atavistic hatred--betrayed and killed any number of desperate Jews who had managed to secure for themselves some precarious refuge outside the ghetto. Many of these predators were known as schmaltzovniks, Poles who extorted money from Jews in hiding--and denounced them once their money was exhausted. Mr. Peczkis refers glancingly to them in his review. About them, he says: "The later schmaltzovniks (szmalcowniki; blackmailers) were recognized by Goldstein as '...these dregs of Polish morality...' (p. 208)."
   
   For a fuller and more accurate impression, I will quote Goldstein at greater length:
   
   "Many times we asked the Polish underground to handle the schmaltzovniks as German collaborators, whom the underground used to condemn to death. We could not take any action ourselves. It was dangerous for a Jewish face to be seen on the street. Far more dangerous was the possibility that a Jew might be discovered in the act of killing a Gentile. Such an action might enflame the entire Polish community against us.
   
   The illegal press often carried notices of persons who collaborated with the Germans. They usually received a sentence of death which was carried out by the underground. Several times it printed warnings against the schmaltzovniks, but I did not hear of a single trial or of any punishment being meted out to them. Despite our appeals, the Polish underground refused to consider a serious campaign against these allies of the Germans ...
   
   Such scoundrels as the schmaltzovniks operated freely and openly, without hindrance, without any signs of popular disapproval. How this was possible remains a psychological mystery." (p. 180-181)



2. Goldstein follows Polish-Jewish relations, beginning with slaughterhouse workers around 1919: "Jews and Poles worked side by side and the relations between them were good, despite the fact that both were strongly nationalistic, unruly, and impulsive." (p. 8). As for the 1930 anti-Jewish excesses (Goldstein's words) at Minsk-Mazovietsky, he points out that a mentally deranged Jew had killed a Polish Army Sergeant, and certain Polish nationalists retaliated collectively against Jews (pp. 13-14). The later schmaltzovniks (szmalcowniki; blackmailers) were recognized by Goldstein as "...these dregs of Polish morality..." (p. 208). Finally, unlike Jan Thomas Gross and his fantastic property-guilt-complex notion, Goldstein has a much more prosaic explanation for the intensity of postwar Polish anti-Semitism: "After so many years of bloodletting and terror, the morale of the liberated people of Poland was at a low ebb. And the conduct of the liberators, the rank-and-file soldiers of the Red Army, who did not shrink from robbery and rape, further demoralized the population. The chaos and anarchy of Polish economic life and the dissatisfaction and disappointment of the Polish population were increased by the economic policies of the new rulers." (p. 278).
   
   Some Polonophobes have equated Bereza Kartuska, an interwar internment camp, with the Nazi and Soviet concentration camps. This is utter nonsense: "In his quiet, deliberate way he [Leon Feiner] told me the story of his experiences during the long months in the Soviet prison at Lida. `I was in the Polish Punishment Camp of Kartuz Berez a long time, but that cannot even be compared to what I lived through under our "comrades"...It is hard for me to say it, but what saved us is that the Nazis drew close to Lida.'" (p. 99).
   
   The Polish Underground refused to support the eventual Warsaw Ghetto Uprising more substantively owing to fears of its expansion to numerous Polish victims (p. 194). Interestingly, in the first stage of the deportations of Warsaw's Jews to Treblinka (July 1942; 60,000 initially-slated deportees), many Jews exhibited a comparable attitude:" But we knew that armed resistance would doom the whole ghetto instead of only sixty thousand. And who, no matter how convinced that the whole ghetto was doomed in any case, could take upon himself the responsibility for precipitating such a catastrophe?...The ghetto had no right to sacrifice sixty thousand human beings so that the survivors might continue their slave existence a little longer...But how would the hundreds of thousands who were not immediately threatened with deportation react to such a proposal? Would they consent to mass suicide?" (p. 111).
   
   The Polish suspicion of the leadership of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising being tainted by Communism finds implicit corroboration in Goldstein's following revealing comments: "On May Day, the ghetto fighters undertook a one-day `offensive'. In the evening they held a roll call of their decimated ranks and sang the `Internationale'." (p. 198). Elsewhere, Goldstein himself has no difficulty referring to Communists as his "good friends" (p. 277).
   
   The surviving Polish Jews constantly complained about American Jews not helping them (p. 272). And, in common with many other authors, Goldstein portrays the Jewish ghetto police as Nazi collaborators (pp. 70-71), faulting them for such things as the forcible roundups (including the uncovering of Jews in hiding) for the death trains (p. 106, 116).
   
   Goldstein paints a complex picture of Polish reactions to Jewish deaths (p. 194) and concludes that Poles had, in effect, been numbed by constant German cruelties: "The four years of Nazi terror, persecution, and anti-Semitic propaganda had poisoned their souls and completely destroyed in many of them any feeling that the Jews were human." (p. 194).
   
   Commonly-voiced complaints about Poles not hiding more Jews ignore the draconian scale of German terror used against Poles, as elaborated by Goldstein: "Each day the terror on the Aryan side increased. There were constant raids, arrests, and executions for the slightest hint of contact with Jews." (p. 183). Also: "The renewed terror on the Aryan side has frightened many Poles whose attitude toward the Jews was friendly. The intensive activity of the Gestapo made hiding a Jew more dangerous each day. Schmaltzovniks were everywhere. Every decent instinct was choked off in the atmosphere of terror, executions, extortion, lawlessness, and complete human demoralization." (p. 201). Also: "The wave of raids and kidnapping, the great manhunt in the city streets, began all over again. Entire blocks of houses were closed off. Bloodhounds sniffed and snooped everywhere. Nazi gangs dragged people from their homes, from attics and basements, beating the killing them. In the tense atmosphere that descended on the entire city, the few Jews who had escaped from the ghetto experienced the most terrible fears." (p. 208). Finally, "The raids in and around Warsaw increased the fright not only of Jews but also the handful of non-Jews who were disposed to help them. It became increasingly difficult to find new hiding places and to retain the old ones..." (p. 228). Apart from the obvious ones, there were countless other daunting challenges facing Polish rescuers of Jews, as elaborated by Goldstein (pp. 213-221).
   
   Goldstein credits Poles for smuggling food into the ghetto (p. 750), for playing the leading role in unmasking Treblinka as a death camp (p. 118), and for warning Jews about the fraudulence of Hotel Polski (p. 203). He points out that the Polish Underground provided several men who, being familiar with Warsaw's sewer system, mapped movement routes within the ghetto and escape routes out of the ghetto (p. 198).
   
   The oft-mentioned looting of Jewish valuables by Poles has another side. After the German-forced evacuation of Warsaw following the doomed Warsaw Uprising, Jews hiding from the Germans amidst the ruins of Warsaw spent time looting the valuables that had been previously buried by the Polish Varsovians (p. 270). Eventually, a theft-and-barter ring developed between the Warsaw-Jewish and the outside-Polish shabrovniks (looters) (p. 271).

5 comments about Heroes: U.S. Marine Corps Medal of Honor Winners.

1. You should know that I did not read this book.
   
   I have a problem with the title. A soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine, does not WIN a medal.
   
   It is earned. And, sad to say in the case of the MoH, very often at the cost of one's life.



2. In this inspiring chronicle of the U.S. Marine Corps, Mr. Cerasini gives us a summarized narrative of this most prestigious service's history. The primary focus is on the individuals who have earned the Medal of Honor, but there is much more.
   
   This is an abbrieviated history, and it has to be. To expound upon thorough details of every war, battle, amphibious landing, and emminent personality, ...would be a monumental and encyclopedic undertaking. For the uninitiated, be you a Marine veteran or not, this book will serve you very well as an introduction to Marine Corps history. As a Marine veteran, I endorse this!
   
   As it should, the narrative begins with the Revolutionary War founding of the U.S.M.C. in Philadelphia, under Captain Samuel Nicholas.
   
   The story takes us from the November 10, 1775 founding, to the Seminole wars, the war of 1812, The Mexican war, the Civil War, the Spanish American war, World Wars I & II, Korea, and Veitnam. Many inter-war operations of note are mentioned in varying detail, as well as numerous other notable historical activities and events pertaining to the Marines.
   
   The major emphasis is placed on brief accounts of notable Marines of the past, many who should be more well-known than they are today. Read about Marines who achieved valorous actions on the battlefield, most often against numerically superior, heavily fortified opponents. Marines who aggressively went forth, often completely alone, caused considerable destruction to enemy personnel. You will also learn of the many Marines whose leadership and innovation made the Marine Corps what it is today.
   
   Not every personality mentioned within this book is a Medal of Honor recipient, but they are all highly significant in their own manner. Indeed, we must realize, that for every man whose great deeds were recognized, there are scores more who have achieved just as much or greater, ...whose contribution will never be known. Sometimes no one was there to witness their heroic action. Sometimes no one else survived the action. Some of these worthy individuals fought and died alone, single-handedly exacting a massive toll for their own lives. Some of them are still with us...but are too humble to tell us anything.
   
   Semper Fidelis



3. I concur with previous comments that much of the book addresses aspects other than Marine Corps Medal of Honor RECIPIENTS (emphasis added.) In scanning the volume I found little new, other than the surprising revelation that naval aviators flew Bell P-39s. That's the result of incompetent research and editing. Otherwise, a decent primer on the subject.



4. Anyone who is a Marine or is an unwavering supporter will probably love this book. Those who are not quite so predisposed will probably be somewhat underwhelmed.

   In the places where the author focusses on a particular individual and describes what he did, it is an interesting and stirring book that leaves you amazed at the bravery each Marine displays. The victories, tragedies, and horrors of war become clear, and while reading about their deeds, you come to realize just how incredible are these men who earn this medal.

   Unfortunately, the author spends too much time NOT writing about heroes.

   Although there are places where there is a lot of interesting detail about the actions of the medal-winner, all too often the text will have three paragraphs about a battle in general, and then literally have only one or two sentences about what the Marine did. Other places, the author simply lists names, saying something like "Other Marines who gave their lives to save fellow Marines during the battle were..." and reels off 8 or 10 names.

   There is a lot of explanation about various wars and police actions and other activities. Indeed, the book really reads more like a history of the Marine Corps than a compilation of descriptions of the deeds of heroes. Although some of this is interesting and provides a useful context for the Marines' actions, it sometimes seems out of place and all too often wanders off into unwanted political opinions and judgements, or tangential ramblings that are distracting and even at times downright boring.

   For an experienced writer, the author also has some annoying habits that I was amazed to see the editors allow through. The author is in love with the words "butcher" and "slaughter." Nobody is ever killed in this book, they are butchered or slaughtered, sometimes both at the same time.

   After a while, the words lose their shock value and meaning, and actually denigrates the seriousness of the situation. I'll agree that killing all 700 Japanese soldiers attacking your position is a slaughter, and when people are killed in their tents during a surprise attack to the rear of the action it's butchering, but when 50 out of 500 are killed during a day-long battle, "butchering" is hyperbole and annoying.

   I still think it's a good book. It should be required reading for every Marine. Anyone interested in the military or stirring stories of heroism will probably like this book.

   But be forewarned that the writing is uneven at best, the book covers a lot more territory than just telling the stories of heroes, and unfortunately it sadly shortchanges many of these heroes by failing to actually tell their stories.




5. Marc Cerasini has written an excellent history of the Marine Corps through the stories of the brave individuals who earned the Medal of Honor.

   Riveting reading. Stories of heroism, triumph, and tragedy set against the backdrop of our nation's various conflicts. We also learn about the history of the Corps and its traditions. Cerasini did a very thorough, comprehensive job. (Frankly, he does the subject right. Not like the Wallace Medal of Honor book, which covers only about 8 service people over ALL services in our ENTIRE military history--pretty quick and dirty approach.) In THIS book, Cerasini does the subject RIGHT. He covers the HUNDREDS of individuals who were awarded the medal, just in the Marine Corps alone. He covers the details of the conflicts in which they earned the medal and he puts those conflicts in context with our history. One small thing. You are awared the medal, you don't win it--so that title has GOT to be the publisher's wrong-headed choice because the author certainly knows his stuff. Anyway, other than that, if you know a Marine, this is one book or she is going to appreciate and enjoy. Again, a real tribute.

No comments about George Stoneman: A Biography of the Union General.