1 comments about A Soldier to the Last: Maj. Gen. Joseph Wheeler in Blue and Gray.

1. My favorite story about Wheeler is when he was at the Battle of Las Guasimas, the first major engagement of the Spanish-American War he is rumored to have seen the Spaniards running away and to have yelled, 'Come on, we've got the damn Yankees on the run!'
   
   Even Mr. Longacre has to admit that this is just a rumor and it's isn't known if it's true or not. But it's too good a story to let it die. And it is true that of the six ex-Confederate generals appointed to be general officers by President McKinley, Wheeler is the only one to have seen actual combat.
   
   The bulk of this book is on Wheeler's activities during the Civil war where he began as a Second Lieutenant and worked his way up to Major General (when he was 26 years old). He was active in most of the battles of the west from Shiloh to the final surrender to Sherman in the Carolinas campaign after the defeat at Atlanta.
   
   The war in the West has never received the attention paid to Lee and the battles in the East. And Wheeler has been overshadowed by Morgan and Forrest as cavalry leaders in the West. This book is a welcome addition to the literature.

5 comments about Napoleon: A Life.

1. Short biography of Napoleon is a good introduction to the man who nearly united and nearly wrecked Europe in stage-setting fashion 100 years before German geopolitical descendants came even closer. Johnson treats Napoleon with respect and at the same time faint distaste for his most extreme actions and amorality.
   
   In the end, while drawing pictures that show Napoleon's smallness of character and stature, Johnson never belittles or pities his charge.



2. Paul Johnson has opinions. And he can write -- lucid, crisp, precise.
   
   Johnson sees Bonaparte as a selfish opportunist who took advantage of the Revolution to seize power. Once in office power was the only language he understood.
   
   Johnson blames the ambition of Bonaparte for a host of modern ills: the birth of total warfare, the rise of angry German nationalism, secret police, government propaganda machines, etc.
   
   He also blames Napoleon for ruining France permanently as a world power. It is hard to argue with his logic on this one -- before Napoleon France is Europe's most significant power for centuries. Since Napoleon France has always been second-rate behind Russia, Germany and Britain.
   
   I am amazed at how much Johnson can pack into one paragraph. And yet its an easy read.
   
   No pictured or maps, and only 187pp.



3. Rule of Thumb: Never! Ever! Trust a Brit to write a truthful account on Napoleon. The British have always written history to favor themselves or make themselves look good! All seven coalitions against France, organized to replace the Monarchy back on the throne against France's will, were all funded by the British. As Emperor Francis said after the battle of Austerlitz: "THIS BRITISH ARE TRADERS IN HUMAN FLESH!" This says it all! The millions who died in those wars can be squarely left at the doorstep of the British. Paul Johnson is in the business as a patriotic Brit, almost expected, to hate Napoleon, and tag him with the label of Tyrant and conqueror. Why? Because Napoleon didn't allow the Royal Familes of Europe to invade France and force a Governement upon then they didn't want? These were wars to Defend France from aggressive neighbors funded by a warmongering Parliament in London. This is bad history.
   I suggest reading:
   
   Napoleon : The Man Who Shaped Europe by Ben Weider and Emile-Rene Gueguen
   or
   The Wars against Napoleon by Ben Weider
   
   Better History, and much more accurate.



4. If you want a short and well researched overview this is it. Not long on battles, strategy, etc.



5. Johnson does a good job of channeling William Pitt, but a poor job of history in this tendentious, glib, shoddy, but, thankfully ,short volume. It is one thing to shy away from hagiography, quite another to omit facts or invent them to create a historical figure that did not exist.
   
   From the very first pages, Johnson proudly displays his biases. He views the French Revolution as an unnecessary "accident", and announces, without any supporting argument save England's example, that the inequalities it addressed would have been solved peacefully in time by history. The scholarship is extremely sloppy, and Johnson continually contradicts himself and gets his facts wrong. Her are but a few examples:
   
   He says Napoleon was not an ideologue, then proclaims him the progenitor of "a new brand of ideological dictator" like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.
   
   He says that Napoleon "never seems to have grasped the essence of the English constitution", yet during the young Napoleon's school years, the text on which he made the most notes was a history of the English constitution. He also tried to bring the English jury system into the Code Civil, but was blocked by the Directory.
   
   He cites a M. de Remurat as saying that Napoleon "is really ignorant, having read very little, and always hastily." A glance at the reading Napoleon did while in school, the notes he took, and the memoirs he dictated at St. Helena, with their detailed knowledge of history and past political affairs, easily give the lie to this.
   
   He writes that Napoleon "did not understand [the sea's] true strategic significance", ignoring Napoleon's continued respect--and envy--of the British Navy, a service he once tried to join. That strategic knowledge is also what prompted him to deny England's demand for the island of Lampedusa, which Bonaparte knew would give the British Navy control of the Mediterranean.
   
   Johnson says Napoleon "took no notice of air power, though it was then much discussed", yet Napoleon noticed it enough to take balloonists on his Egyptian expedition.
   
   Regarding leaving Corsica, Johnson imputes to Napoleon the following: "So he asked himself , where does the nearest source of real power lie? And the answer came immediately: France." Napoleon was a ten year-old boy when he left Corsica, being sent away to military school. He might have been thinking of glory, more likely he was missing his mother.
   
   Regarding returning to Corsica, Napoleon, Johnson writes, "took no interest in the place once he had left it." Not only did Napoleon order numerous books on Corsica while in school, but he returned to the island in 1791 on leave, then petitioned the War Office to stand for election in the Corsican National Guard. He fought his first engagements as an officer in Corsica.
   
   He states that Napoleon, "made no lifelong friends at the college or the academy"--except for Alexandre des Mazis, who wrote a memoir about Napoleon. Interestingly, Johnson doesn't cite des Mazis, but he does cite Bourrienne's memoirs--which have been totally discredited.
   
   He says Napoleon retired after Toulon and "following his principle of going direct to where power lay, he went to Paris. " Napoleon did not retire; he'd been removed from the artillery and posted to the infantry, when, severely depressed, he moved into a cheap hotel on The Left Bank.
   
   
   Johnson tries his best to link Napoleon with the twentieth century's dictators. Indeed, it's the centerpiece of his thematic argument. Of the Italian Campaign, which he calls a "looting expedition", he writes that Napoleon's "technique adumbrated the Stalinist methods used in Eastern Europe at the end of the Second World War." The Old Guard was "rather like Hitler's military SS division"--except for the fact that Napoleon's army liberated Jews, instead of murdering them. He cites all the Englishmen who hated Bonaparte and the few who didn't, like Keats and Shelley, who "fell for the propaganda", like "Shaw for Stalin, Mailer for Castro, and Sartre for Mao"! Bonaparte's "monumental schemes were like those of Mussolini and Speer." Yet Johnson offers not a shred of evidence to support his point that Napoleon was the progenitor of the 20th century's great dictators.
   
   (Johnson goes on at length about Napoleon's looting, never comparing it to other empires' spoils, say, for example, those inside the British Museum, which houses the Rosetta stone, discovered by Napoleon's Egyptian Expedition. )
   
   Johnson makes other broad generalizations, again without any support in the text: "The 19th century was in general a time of peace" or "The Revolution created the modern totalitarian state". His prose borders on purple: "He blew himself into the stratosphere of power from the brazen mouth of his own guns." But for the most part, the book consists largely of unsupported calumnies against Napoleon: "He was not a patriot either" ; "The Italians themselves he despised"; "He was not moved by sentiment ; "His sensibilities were blunt. His compassion was shallow." He had "an inability to delegate", which must have been news to those living in an Empire of 40 million!
   
   To Johnson, Napoleon's wives are portrayed as sexually dissatisfied, his marshals as writhing lackeys, his relations hapless rulers, and Napoleon himself a rapist.
   
   Johnson's enmity stems from his contempt for Bonaparte's militarism. He says that Napoleon "unleashed on Europe the most destructive wars the continent had ever experienced", and, "Bonaparte , having once unsheathed his sword, found it impossible to lay it down for long."
   
   But Johnson never once mentions the contribution to that outcome by England's War Party, which refused to make peace with France after 1800. Bonaparte "emerged from a political background where a man's word meant nothing, honor was dead, and murder was routine," and "William Pitt found ... that [Napoleon's ] word could never be trusted". But nowhere does Johnson mention that it was the British--and Pitt's War Party in particular-- who broke their word in the Treaty of Amiens when they refused to leave Malta after Napoleon had left Taranto. The best Johnson can muster here is "Both Britain and France, mutually suspicious, refused to carry out the terms of the treaty."
   
   These oversights are not for lack of space: Johnson spends three pages on Napoleon's wedding arrangement to Marie-Louise, scarcely a paragraph on the Code Civil. Maybe that's what led him to conclude that cultural displays were "the most successful aspect of Bonaparte's dictatorship." As for the Code itself, "Bonaparte did not create it" and "its apparent novelty was not new."
   
   There are a few bright spots: the last 50 pages give a decent rundown of the Spanish and Russian campaigns, but they can't save this Pocket Book of the Bad, Bad Bonaparte. There are no footnotes, no bibliography, but there is one saving grace--the book is less than 200 pages.

3 comments about Gettysburg Requiem: The Life and Lost Causes of Confederate Colonel William C. Oates.

1. On July 2, 1863, the second day of the Battle of Gettysburg, Confederate Lieutenant Colonel William C. Oates let his troops, the 15th Alabama, in the fateful and unsuccessful charge against Joshua Chamberlain and the 20th Maine on the far left of the Union line at Little Round Top. Chamberlain and the 20th Maine have become American heroes, but far less attention is given to Oates. In "Gettysburg Requiem" (2006) Glenn Lafantasie offers the first full-scale biography of Oates (1833 -- 1910). It is an intruiguing picture of a man and his times and of the changing South after the Civil War. LaFantasie is a professor of Civil War history and Director fo the Center for the Civil War in the West at Western Kentucky University. He is the author of "Twilight at Little Round Top", a book which focuses on the stuggle for this famous hill on the second day of Gettysburg.
   
   Oates lived a long and eventful life. He was raised in poverty. In his mid-teens, he fled Alabama to avoid prosecution for incidents resulting from what would become his lifelong propensity to violence. For several years, he lived the life of a wanderer in Texas and Louisiana. Oates returned to Alabama, disciplined himself, and became a successful attorney. An ardent Confederate, he raised a company, served with Stonewall Jackson, and with Lee, and participated in many important battles of the Civil War. He was wounded six times and ultimately lost his right arm. After the Civil War, Oates returned to Abbeyville, Alabama where he became wealthy through his law practice and land speculations. He served seven terms in the United States House of Representatives and one term as the Governor of Alabama. Oates was named a Brigadier General in the Spanish-American War, but he never saw combat in that conflict. In 1905, Oates published a book on which he had worked for years, "The War between the Union and the Confederacy and its Lost Opportunities."
   
   Lafantasie gives a full picture of Oates's career, and he describes Oates's character as well. Throughout his life, Oates was courageous, but he remained prone to violence. After losing his right arm late in the war, Oates fathered a child with a young African American woman who was his servant and was nursing him back to health. Later, Oates fathered another illigitimate child with an adolescent 14 years of age. At the age of 48, Oates married a young woman, "T" who was 19. The marriage was lasting (over 28 years) and Oates loved his family and supported the education of his children, including the two illigitimate sons, through college, graduate school, and successful careers. According to LaFantasie, Oates' life was driven by a desire to have power over others. He describes Oates as racist, sexist, and xenophobic. Yet he recognizes many fine qualities in his subject. In 1901, Oates acted courageously at the Alabama Constitutional Convention where he was in a distinct minority in opposing changes which led to the disenfranchismement of Alabama's black citizens.
   
   The best parts of this book are those which describe Oates's early rootless days of wandering in Texas and those which describe Oates's career in the Confederate Army. Lafantasie has a close, detailed knowledge of the fighting for Little Round Top. By focusing on Oates' role in the struggle, Lafantasie made the battle, and the combat between the 15th Alabama and the 20th Maine clearer to me than many accounts which try to discuss the totality of the action. Lafantasie convincingly shows that the Battle for Little Round Top was the pivotal event of Oates's life. Oates's younger brother, John, was fatally wounded in the fight for Little Round Top. John had been ill, and Oates tried to keep him out of the combat, but John insisted on moving forward. Oates never forgave himself. Many soldiers close to Oates died on the hill. Oates relived his brother's death, the terrible combat, and the failure to take Little Round Top many times during the ensuing 46 years of his life. He tried, unsuccessfully, to get a monument to the 15th Alabama at the point of their closest penetration of the Union position and he corresponded with his one-time foe, Joshua Chamberlain.
   
   Lafantasie also gives a good picture of the changes in the South following the Civil War as mirrored in Oates's long life and in his career as Congressman and governor. Oates became a proponent of the "Lost Cause" school of the Civil War, which romanticized the Old South and blamed the defeat of the Confederacy solely on the Union's superiority in numbers and material. Much in Oates life suggests he remained an unreconstructed Confederate to the end. But he did have moments, especially at the 1901 convention, that show he was finding his way to a different, broader view.
   
   It is good to have a biography of Oates. Lafantasie's study is thorough and well-documented. In places it is also polemical, insufficiently historical, and psychologistic, as Lafantasie criticizes sexist attitudes in the South, in particular, and is overly harsh in his speculations on the reasons underlying Oates' attraction to young women. Lafantasie also at times adopts the tone of a historical novel more than that of a history as he tries to read Oates's thoughts and mind in the absence of hard evidence. With these qualifications, I enjoyed and learned something about Oates, the Civil War and the post-Civil War South from reading this book. Readers with a deep interest in the Battle of Gettysburg or in the South after the Civil War will benefit from Lafantasie's study.
   
   Robin Friedman



2. Two men who have had a very significant impact on the Civil War as we know it today lived a century after it ended. Neither was a soldier; neither was a professional historian. Michael Shaara was a novelist. Ken Burns is a documentary filmmaker. As evidence of their influence, just take a look at that standard reference, Mark M. Boatner's Civil War Dictionary, first published in 1959. Look there to see what you can find out about William C. Oates, the colonel of the 15th Alabama who led the attack against the 20th Maine on Little Round Top. What will you find? Nothing. Oates isn't in the book. Now, however, nearly fifty years after Boatner compiled his dictionary, Oates is a very well known character to anyone who has read Shaara's book or seen Burns's Civil War series.
   This past summer the first full-length biography of Oates appeared, more than 400 pages about a man who never actually attained the rank of colonel, a man who was replaced as commander of the 15th Alabama after leading it for nearly two years, a man who fifty years ago did not warrant a footnote in one of the Civil War's standard reference works. So, does he warrant being the subject of a full-blown biography?
   You bet. Glenn W. Fantasie has done a terrific job of telling Oates's tale, and of using him as a tool to delve into the greater issues that filled Oates's own life and times. Oates's path through life was one that easily lends itself to the telling of a great story. He began as a hot-tempered brawler who frequented the small towns of pre-war Texas. He ended as a Southern politician who could actually entertain, and fight for, the idea of giving black men the vote. In between he raised a company to fight for the Confederacy, was brave to a fault (or so his men thought), lost an arm at Petersburg, served seven terms in Congress fighting against railroad land grants and for free silver, and one term as the governor of Alabama.
   As the title suggests, the cause of the Confederacy was not his only "lost cause," and it is by laying those others before us that Professor LaFantasie makes this biography so much more than just another biography about a Civil War soldier whose main attraction to an author is that he has not been written about before. Oates was a fascinating character. His constant desire to lead from the front made him a prominent figure throughout the times in which he lived. This fine biography does him the justice denied him in times past.



3. William C. Oates, the subject of Glenn LaFantassie's "Gettysburg Requiem" is a bundle of contradictions: born poor, died wealthy; apparently racist, secretly intimate with his black servant; a respected attorney and newspaper publisher but shot and killed a man; wounded six times in battle but rose no higher in rank than lieutenant colonel; saw Lincoln's election as a danger to the South, lamented Lincoln's assassination.
   
   LaFantasie's research reveals a Confederate hero whose life was characterized by anger, violence, guilt,inconsistencies, weaknesses, and relentless struggle for success. Oates may well be described as one of those souls who can resist anything but temptation.
   
   The book's bibliography is a compendium of excellent Civil War
   sources, the research seems to be as complete as anyone could compile, and the presentation is as clear and easy to follow as the subject matter will allow.
   
   Those who have climbed Little Round Top at Gettysburg, who are fascinated with the battle between the 20th Maine and the 15th Alabama, who want to know more about the post-war conflicts between General Joshua Chamberlain and "Colonel" Oates over the placement of monuments on the battlefield will find "Gettysburg Requiem" required reading.

2 comments about LIFE'S TOO SHORT TO CRY: The Inspirational Memoir of an Ace Battle of Britain Fighter Pilot.

1. With memories of Geoffrey Wellum's recent book 'First Light', I was excited to find that a new Second World War RAF pilot's autobiography had been published so recently as 2006. I found the facts of the book most interesting, but it lacks tension and literary style, and I never found myself wanting to read on and on, as with Wellum and many other authors. As a keen student of the great Douglas Bader, I was fascinated by Vigors' references to their flying together, at a time when Bader was developing his ideas on tactics and leadership. To be fair, Tim's death came before his book could be properly edited, and it is well worth reading for the history surrounding the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse, and the Royal Navy's lack of understanding of air power, despite the lessons learned in Europe.



2. This memoir of a fighter pilot in World War II left me with several thoughts.
   
   First was the thought that no matter how good you were, fate or luck or whatever had a lot to do with your survival. One time with almost no warning the Germans were bombing their air field. They were emergency scrambling to get airborne. Some of the Spitfires were hit by German bombs. They paid no attention as to how good a pilot you were. In another instance Vigors was scheduled to fly somewhere on a transport aircraft. He got bumped off the flight by a general. The plane was shot down, no survivors.
   
   Second there's an interesting insight to the loss of the 'Prince of Wales' and 'Repulse.' Vigors was the commander of the squadron that was to provide them with continuous dawn to dusk air cover. Admiral Phillips took his two ships to sea without telling the Air Force. You have to presume that he was one of the Battleship Admirals who refused to believe that his majestic, powerful ship could be hurt by those pesky little aircraft. He went down with his ship.
   
   Finally I find myself wondering about his love life. In England he was in love with the beautiful Jil. In Singapore there is a comment that he married Jan. The manuscript for the book was found after his death and submitted for publication by his widow Diana. Way to go flyboy.

2 comments about Our Mother's War: A Biography of a Child of the Dutch Resistance.

1. What is Anne Frank had lived? I cannot help but think her story might have mirrored that of the late Lakshmi Radich of Sonoma County, CA.
   Her war experience is recounted in this moving story which began in Rotterdam 68 years ago with the devastating German blitzkreig.
   Until that day, Lakshmi, a cheerful 9 year old Dutch girl,lived a peaceful and relatively unremarkable existence.
   That all ended abruptly. In the early morning, German planes flying so low you could see the faces of the pilots in the cockpit unloaded their parachuting human cargo to capture the sleeping city. Initially refusing to surrender, Rotterdam took the brunt of heavy German bombing. At her worried mother's insistence, she and Lakshmi traveled by foot, braving heavy intermittent gunfire, to check on the well-being of the girl's grandmother, who lived a two-hour walk away.
   If that journey had been the most harrowing part of her life during the war, Lakshmi would have been fortunate. With her father already a part of the Dutch mobilization, Lakshmi and her mother themselves joined the Dutch Resistance. They harbored their Jewish neighbors, friends and countless strangers. She declined to be labeled a hero. "I'm not a hero. I'm just a human being who did what had to be done when it needed to be done."
   What she did was remarkable. Not only did she and her non-Jewish friends wear a Star of David to confuse the Germans until they caught on, she and her mother, after being found out, left their home and continued their efforts apart from one another to avoid being captured at the same time.
   Radich left her childhood behind that day in May. She grew up quickly. She was forced to witness fellow citizens hanged from lampposts; their bodies left untouched as a reminder of the penalty for disobedience. She saw many deported to death camps. She was raped beginning at age 10 by men in every uniform, leaving her in an "emotional no-man's land" where "the scars of war run very deep."
   She was able to keep informed of the war by listening to banned radio broadcasts from the West.
   She never found her mother after the war, but she was reunited with her father. Her war ended on a train ride to Rotterdam with refugees returning from a death camp. She and a survivor with a shaved head shared a flea and lice infested sheepskin. They sat huddled together, legs dangling from a box car. It marked the physical but not psychological end to the war for her.
   Her war experiences in no way trained her for life in Sonoma. She also found out what it was like to be a survivor but not always accepted as one because she was not Jewish.
   In time, Lakshmi Radich, with the love, help and support of her two daughters, Christina and Laurina, along with counseling, spiritual growth through trips to India and the supportive Jewish community that recorded her story for the Holocaust Library, was able to come to terms, if not peace, with her past so much so that she regained her faith in a God, who could "allow such a horror to exist."



2. 'Our Mother's War' is a child's-eye view of the random horror that was World War II. It has historical value because the authors recorded the fragmented and often traumatized memories of a Dutch resistance participant, starting from age nine and extended to her early maturity. The narrative is aided by an historical perspective supplied by one of the authors, Mel Fiske, an avuncular figure who found value in the loving researches of two sisters who had observed the continuing sorrow of their mother, decades after she survived the war. He died a few days after the Radich sisters presented him with a finished copy of the memoir. The brief and touching book testfies to their mother's irreparably broken childhood and constitutes an act of filial love.

No comments about Kitty Harris: The Spy With 17 Names.

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!

3 comments about One Day in Vietnam: The True Story of an Army Bird Dog Pilot.

1. These experiences of a Birddog pilot during the Vietnam war are told the author and he had recorded them in this book. If you were there it will bring back lots of memories. And for Birddog pilots it is even mor interesting.



2. Bought this for my husband. (we own a birddog). He is picky about what he reads and he could not put this book down. He felt like you really go to know the pilot. The author who was related and wrote the book did a great job. A must read about a young life. A fraternity brother.



3. As a back seat Air Observer with the 220th RAC out of Phu Bai, I was very interested in this book. It was a great read and a good reminder of what I did in Viet Nam. I am sorry this pilot was killed. I also had a pilot killed flying with me and I did get out of the plane after it crashed. All interested in this kind of reading should read it as soon as possible.

4 comments about White Tigers: My Secret War in North Korea (Memories of War).

1. When I received my May, 2002 VFW magazine I was overwhelmed by the story of guerrilla operations that were successfully carried out in North Korea during the Korean War. When I had finished reading Colonel Ben S. Malcom's "White Tigers" I knew that I had read a story that would touch the minds and hearts of all who had been placed in harm's way. I was able to sense his frustration, his anger, his fear, his disappointments, his elation at success, but more important, his love for his country. He dared to expose his depth of compassion and deep commitment to the partisan force placed under his charge. By relating his personal experience, he brought to light the danger for having a short sighted reluctance within the upper echelon of the army in finding merit in unconventional warfare. I am extremely grateful for his leadership and an intimate knowledge of the brave service and sacrifice made by him and members of the White Tiger donkey units. As his story continued to unfold, I was drawn to recall my own expreience that took place but a scant few miles from where Ben's White Tiger operations were being carried out. I had been a member of Operation Broken Reed, an intelligence mission that took place during January, 1952. I was rescued along with two other surviving team members following the mission. I recalled the bitter cold, the fear of being captured and what that would mean, the extreme fatigue resulting from a thirty-mile forced march to the Yellow Sea, the deteriorating physical and mental condition of my two comrades, the difficult terrain and the rescue. As I read Ben's book I realized that the point of our rescue from a ledge overlooking the Yellow Sea was but a few miles from Wollae and Paengnyong Islands, the White Tiger base of operation. When I wrote the colonel in June, 2002 I received a warm immediate reply. He stated that there was no doubt in his mind that "Operation Broken Reed" was a CIA operation. Colonel Malcom's encouragement was instrumental in my publishing the story of Broken Reed that has been published by Da Capo Press. In my estimation, Colonel Malcom's silver star is inadequate to acknowledge the level of his bravery and service. I highly recommend the reading of White Tigers.
   
   Arthur L. Boyd, Lt. Col, US Army, Retired.



2. In the world of foreign military advisors, Ben Malcom's name is not a household word in comparison to Joe Stilwell, John Glubb, Edward Lansdale, and, of course, T E Lawrence. His short memoir of life with North Korean guerrillas during the Korean War deserves to be read along with those of his more famous colleages.
   
   Ben Malcom was trained as a traditional military officer, but was thrust into a highly unusual role as an advisor to a small group of North Korean guerrillas fighting against the North Korean government. Until the 1990s, the missions the so-called White Tigers undertook were still classified. While their contribution to the overall war effort can be disputed, Malcom's lessons cannot be ignored for what they teach us about the US Army and its abiding discomfort with non-traditional warfare.
   
   Malcom demonstrates convincingly that the US Army forgot many of the lessons derived from working with partisan forces from Burma to Greece to France during the Second World War. Those lessons would have proved invaluable to young Lieutenant Malcom as he took on a role he was not trained for, but for which he demonstrated great aptitude. His book takes us from his ROTC days, to instructor at Fort Knox, through his time in Korea, and finally to Vietnam, where he experienced a nasty case of de ja vue. His memoir is short, but exciting and written with great verve.
   
   Much has been written about the current conflict in Iraq and how the the US military is adapting to re-learn the lessons it forgot after Vietnam about insurgency, counter-insurgency, and partisan warfare. Many authors have applauded the adaptability of the US military; Malcom's book is a cautionary tale that shows we have been down this path before and failed to institutionalize the lessons of previous conflict. For that alone, his memoir is worth the price.



3. (Note: Part of the details furnished here are based on my discussions with the author shortly after White Tigers was originally released)

   First, I'll have to say I'm a bit prejudiced toward Ben Malcom. COL Ben Malcom was the post commander at Fort McPherson, Georgia in the late 70's and I commanded his military police company. In fact, Ben was instrumental in my career -- first he allowed me to command a company as a first lieutenant, something his predecessor would not do. Second, he literally pushed my application for a regular army commission through and made sure it was approved. Ben is a true gentleman and was a fine Army officer.

   On to the book. White Tigers recounts Ben's story, from ROTC to the Infantry, and shortly after his commission, to Korea. Ben was scheduled to be a rifle platoon leader in Korea, but was somewhat randomly selected to train North Korean partisans --- behind enemy lines. What was so remarkable about Ben's selection is that he is over 6', has no oriental features, and did not speak Korean.

   Ben found himself behind enemy lines where he trained a battalion-size North Korean force, and managed to get to the mainland on more than one occasion to recruit and do combat -- where he was awarded the Silver Star.

   My favorite portion of the book is Ben recounting how he left Korea after a year wearing the Silver Star, but no combat patch (his unit did not have patch) and no combat infantryman's badge (his unit was not recognized as a line infantry unit that qualified for the CIB). When Ben reported in to his next unit, his superiors asked how it was that he was wearing a silver star, but no combat patch or CIB. Ben's answer: "I'm sorry, I can't disclose that because it's classified."

   And Ben's operations were classified -- in fact, for more than 40 years. Ben had started a book in the mid-50s, but terminated his efforts because of the classification of the operations in which he was involved. Once the operations were declassified in the early 90s, Ben dusted off his 40-year old manuscript, which served as the basis for White Tigers.

   I will have to say that White Tigers is not an accomplished thriller -- however, what it is is a fine personal account of Ben's exploits in a very unusual operation. Many of the activities that Ben was involved in -- and many that he directed ad lib due to the lack of training and doctrine --have become the basis of some special operations today.

   Ben deserves a huge well done for an outstanding effort in documenting a very unusual experience. I would highly recommend his work.

   Charles D. Childers Colonel, US Army




4. This is an interesting addition to the military history collection. The book is an account of indigent intelligence gathering and sabotage operations behind the lines in North Korea. A few U.S. Army Officers and Enlisted men were tabbed as advisors to assist North Korean nationals in the disruption of the Communist forces north of the DMZ. For the most part well written, the narrative is most worthy by demonstrating the reluctance, if not downright obstructionism shown by senior Army members toward unconventional warfare in this period. The young officers selected for the mission generally had little if any training or background for the job and were given minimal support. A good accounting of the initiative and ingenuity of our young college grads when thrown in a difficult position.

1 comments about The Surgeon and the Shepherd: Two Resistance Heroes in Vichy France.

1. The interaction of the local French working with a brave person combined to make this story of individual bravery inspiring. The unoccupied area of France during the first part of the Second World War provided opportunity for some to resist against Nazi oppression. It took those who were willing to take risks for the benefit of others that provides the satisfaction of the read.