5 comments about At Hitler's Side: The Memoirs of Hitler's Luftwaffe Adjutant.

1. Von Below was Adolf Hitler's Luftwaffe adjutant for eight years, from 1937 to the very end of the war. As such he held many intimate conversations with Hitler and in this well-written (and very well translated) memoir, he claims to have had Der Fuhrer's confidence. That he remained in this job for 8 years is proof enough of that fact. Von Below's portrait of Hitler on the job is very different from the raving single-minded maniac usually portrayed in movies and popular biographies. Von Below claims that if one knew how to approach Hitler one could reason with him and even get him to change his mind. By this account Hitler was a hard-working, dedicated, charismatic and intelligent leader who was often misled by his subordinates. Von Below claims to have known nothing about the mass murders committed by the Nazis. He also claims to have had serious misgivings about Hitler's war strategy; and he writes that he was well aware of the shortcomings of the Luftwaffe. As a pilot himself, I tend to believe him outright on this point, but otherwise I don't know how much of the insight he claims to have had into strategic matters might have been colored by hindsight. In any event, he was never able to convince Hitler although he writes that many times he did express his doubts to Der Fuhrer, who always heard him out. Compare this book with the memoir written by Hitler's pilot, Hans Bauer. Both men, knowing the end was inevitable, stuck it out and for that we must admire their courage and dedication. I don't think they remained with Hitler in Germany's doomed capital because of some lemming-like compulsion to destruction ingrained in the German psyche, but because of their personal devotion to Hitler. And since neither man was an idiot nor a war criminal with nothing to lose, commanding such loyalty from men like these says a lot about Adolf Hitler's personality. Bauer spent 10 years in a Russian POW camp while von Below managed to escape the Russians after Hitler gave him permission to escape from Berlin. For my money this book ends too abruptly. I would like to know what happened to von Below after the war and that is why I gave it only 4 stars. But in summary, this book is a valuable addition to the study of Adolf Hitler and a testament to its author, who I think was a man of honor.



2. Although the book ends quite abruptly, it was a book that I could not put down. One can almost see in first-person Hitlers moods and thought processes. It's as if you were in the room with him. Very, very interesting.



3. Readers expecting a plethora of new information on Hitler will be sorely disappointed. Von Below is a pedantic, careful and very dry reteller of history and his memoirs seem contrived in points and highly self-serving. Many reviews point out that von Below never heard Hitler mention the Jews or the death camps, but this is quite believable. Hitler compartmentalized all personal relationships and why would he mention these any atrocities to his Luftwaffe adjutant?

   Von Below doesn't really tell us anything new about Hitler, and his personal anecdotes are tragically few. He comes up with some pithy observations on Goering and Goebbels, but it's frustrating that he doesn't elaborate more on Hitler, his entourage, or the inner workings at the Berghof, the Chancellory or in various wartime HQ's.

   The book's main flaw is that it ends almost mid-word and mid-sentence. There is no explanation of what happened to von Below after the war, he simply stops the narrative and packs up shop. Very curious indeed. One improvement over the German-language version is the addition of notes, an expanded index and some editorial inclusions. Another weakness is that von Below was never close to Hitler, nor part of his intimate personal entourage. His transactions with Hitler were generally of a military, not personal, nature, but don't expect many fireworks in this dry tome.




4. This book doesn't present anything groundbreaking about Hitler, but it s particularly valuable for its picture of what it was like to live around Hitler for many years. As part of Hitler's personal staff, especially for such a long time, Below's experiences were obviously unique and would be interesting to anyone interested in WWII or Hitler. It present an insider's view of what was going on at Hitler's headquarters. In many cases (he claimed) he was not in the know. Below wrote that it was only later, after the war, that he found out the full extent of the atrocities. This was probably true, as it was with many members of his personal staff, who lived isolated lives with Hitler, who never spoke directly about it. Below does say, however, that he finds it inconceivable that Himmler would have exterminated Jews without Hitler's knowledge. Himmmler would not have informed Hitler about the details, writes Below, but Hitler certainly gave his go-ahead. It's little passages like this one that make this book interesting to read, if one is interested in the subject.



5. Von Below was Hitler's Luftwaffe aide. He details his story through the war years at Hitler's side. Von Below is somewhat self serving here as he tries to portray he had Hitler's ear on many important matters such as equipment and personnel. Perhaps he did, or maybe Hitler used him as a sounding board. It is interesting to read the revelations on Hitler's inner circle. Nothing new in facts are proved by his story. However, we get a better idea on how Hitler functioned during the war years.
   
   Historians will find nothing new in this story. Hitler is portrayed as a hypocrite when he hears about the Katyn Forest Massacre of Polish officers and says that one should expect that from the Soviets. This was during the time when his soldiers and SS were massacring millions. As stated, the author inflates his contribution to Hitler's decisions. Otherwise, this is a nice read.

No comments about Journals of Robert Rogers of the Rangers.

3 comments about Winged Dagger: Adventures on Special Service.

1. For all those interested in military history, and in this case, the desert war and the following allied forces campaign in Italy this book proves entertaining reading. The book is a commentary by the author of his own experiences as an armored corps officer, and later, as a pioneer of "behind enemy lines" commando warfare. Included are reflections on the tides and fortunes of the British forces, which provide the context for some riveting accounts of the authors own combat experience. The author describes himself and his actions candidly, especially as a young inexperienced officer. The authors' story includes capture, escape and subsequent return to operate behind enemy lines with other British troops, leading Italian partisans in their fight against Germany. This form of warfare was at its infancy in its modern form, its importance not fully understood by the British high command. The success of this operation depended greatly on the authors' initiative and drive in the face of an unsympathetic and disinterested general staff. The book was written some two to three years after the end of the war, and the events are fresh in the authors memory. End.



2. nothing groundbreaking here, but it is a nice look at early special warfare. The British SAS invented special warfare during WWII and this books looks at some of the earlier operations. Thre are some real good adventures here. The book is a first hand account. The book does not have any analysis. Any fan of the SAS should give it a shot.



3. The book covers the period from 1940 to 1945 and chronicles the adventures of the author over this period, being split into 3 parts. Part I covers the Middle East 1940-1943 and covers Farran's part in Wavell's successful campaign against the Italians in Cyrenaica and the subsequent withdrawl as Rommel's Afrika Corps arrived and counterattacked. Farran's unit withdrew and was reequipped and sent to Crete, where he fought alongside the New Zealand Army (he has a lot of nice things to say about the Maori Battalion). Farran was captured, ended up in a prison camp in Greece and escaped. He ended up back in Egypt, back with Tanks again, and fought on the Western Desert and El Alamein, where he was injured. Following injury, he was evacuated to South Africa and then back to the UK in 1943. End of Part I.
   
   Part II covers Farran's time with the Special Air Service. He'd managed to escape from the UK back to the Middle East where he was looking for active service and stumbled on an acquaintance in the SAS. He was promptly recruited, trained and started on SAS operations with the invasion of Sicily, where he led a SAS unit. This section covers SAS operations in Italy during 1943 where the SAS roamed in jeeps behind the enemy lines in the early part of the invasion. Farran then participated in SAS operations behind German lines in France in 1944, where he led a SAS unit operating with jeeps in roving attacks. Part III covers SAS operations in Italy in 1945, where SAS units joined and led units of Italian partisans in attacks on the Germans.
   
   The book really is an account of Farran's adventures during the war. It's an interesting account, pays no attention to strategy or tactics except in passing. He concentrates on the actions themslves and his part in them, what he did, what his immediate unit did and what he felt and thought at the time. He's a good writer, you can get a good idea of what it must have been like and you can recapture some of the emotions and feelings of the times. The book was written in 1948, soon after the war ended, there was no sympathy for the Germans and in those non-PC times, Farran could be quite open about actions that would now result in expressions of outrage - machine-gunning surrendering Germans in Crete for example - something any New Zealander of the time would have been quite happpy to assist with after some of the atrocities committed by the Germans against NZ'ers there.
   
   It's a good read but don't expect a history of the SAS or anything like that. It's a history of Farran's adventures in the war - which included 2 years with the SAS and 3 years prior to that with the Armoured Corps fighting in the Western Desert and Crete. Stirring stuff indeed!

No comments about "Next Voyage Will Be Different!".

5 comments about Ataturk.

1. The author does a fine job in what is obviously a very thoroughly-researched and well-written work. The main thing I liked about this book is that it didn't just discuss a chronology of Ataturk's career but also looked into the ideas and influences which molded the future leader of the Turkish Republic. A little long at places, the book nevertheless makes sure the context of developments is known to the reader as well as the events themselves. While not destined to be a favorite book of mine I can certainly recommend it as a great work in this field of history.



2. This book contains everything you ever wanted to know about Ataturk and much, much, much more. I found that the book devoted so much detail to essentially insignificant parts of Atturk's life that it diminished the story of his rise to power and his use of it to bring about enormous changes in Turkey in an amazingly short period of time.



3. This is an excellent book for what it is---but it was not quite what I was looking for. Ataturk is a fascinating individual who dictated wideranging reforms. I wanted to know how and why he came by his phylosophies--other than he believed the church was a huge detriment to society.
   
   This is a very detailed history, including names of associates, political intrigues, battles, who moved what troops where, etc, but short on the reforms and their reasons. For example, page 468, "An obedient assembly continued to pass laws imported from Europe: court procedure was reformed, the German commercial code and Swiss law on bankruptcy were adopted; agricultural cooperatives were established". This is the only mention of any of these important things in the entire book.
   
   I'm certainly don't regret reading it and I learned a great deal. Now I need a book that goes into all the changed Ataturk made. If someone has a recommendation, pleas email me.



4. I found this book to be an exhaustive review of the almost day to day schedule of Mustapha Kemal throughout his life. Although extremely thorough, it is quite easy to get lost in the minutiae. The author dissects each vignette in excruciating detail in an attempt to separate fact from self-serving legend, but what little analysis is provided simply excuses or downplays the ruthlessness of the protagonist. Outright murder, exile and/or jailing of his political opponents such as journalists are excused with statements such as in any revolution, a few must fall by the wayside. Massacres and deportations of Armenians, Greeks, and Kurds are barely alluded to, while the author's main sympathies are revealed in statements such as "General Muglali's career ended sadly...he was courtmartialed for having ordered the shooting of thirty-three Kurdish tribesman" (p.477). Mustafa Kemal's curious habit of adopting "daughters" is noted throughout the text with barely a comment until the very end of the book when the author reveals that a black eunuch guards his harem, and one of his daughters, Atef, is in fact his "intimate companion". In my opinion, the best part of the book consists of the last several chapters, when the author summarizes the Gazi's career and his role in Turkish and world history. Unfortunately, it took 500 uncritical pages to get there.



5. Andrew Mango has obviously done a great deal of research into his fascinating subject. The book is a thorough history of the life and career of Mustapha Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. Even though he was autocratic in many respects, there can be no denying that he was a visionary who built a powerful modern Western nation out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. The current rulers of Turkey, specifically Erdogan and Gul, ought to spend some time acquainting themselves with Ataturk before plunging the country headlong down the Islamist path.
   
   The main problem with the book is that Mango is not much of a writer. His prose is pedestrian, and he has no flair for narrative. Having read "1453" by Roger Crowley, the fascinating story of the fall of Constantinople, I know that history can be every bit as exciting as an adventure novel. Alas, "Ataturk" at times resembles a mere recitation of events in the protagonist's life.
   
   So although I have given the book 5 stars, the reader should be aware that he/she is in for a long, hard slog at times.

5 comments about 182 Days in Iraq.

1. i worked with this guy for almost 2 years and i have to say he is one of the worst people i ever met.
   he was always sneaking out of work to hit the lake so he could ride his wave runner. his work load was pretty easy compaired to other jobs in the army and he did it poorly. the stories he sent back from Iraq (all two of them) were about his time at the pool getting a tan. there is a pattern here.
   i am glad the army doesnt want him anymore and he is no longer serving this great country.
   there are better books, written by better people who actually did some REAL good in Iraq. read them.



2. This is a great, easy read. In journal form, it makes it easy to follow. I felt like I could image what it would be like to become accustomed to being in Iraq, in a war zone. Written from the point of view of a "regular guy".



3. Having lost a son in this war, I am thirsty for any accounts of the "real" feedback of some one who has been there, and Phil has. I have met the author in person just recently and wanted to hear more of his story. I find it hard to put down, so much that the average American nevers hears of, about this war, is found in the pages of Phil's journal.It is written from the gut, no flowery adjectives, just the real story, so refreshing when it comes to accounts of what has and continues to happen. I wish that the media would tell the stories of the hope, renewal and justification of our troops finishing the job they were sent to do, with pride and honor.



4. This self-published work is a "diary" of an enlisted Public Affairs soldier written during his six-month Iraqi tour in late 2004 (with additional material describing events subsequent to the author's discharge). It would have benefited from the attention of an experienced editor as the raw prose and gratuitous editorializing detracts from the work.
   
   The author clearly believes in the mission, and is interested in emphasizing the positive aspects of the coalition presence, such as building schools and roads, as well as facilitating elections. Unfortunately, he fails to elaborate on these events and instead focuses on himself, conveying an almost false bravado that left this reader uncomfortable. I have no doubt that the author covered the missions described, but there is a nearly narcissistic perspective that prevades the commentary indicating a direct rather than indirect involvement in the events.
   
   The entries provide glimpses into the author's personality, and occaisionally the reader gets the impression that he is describing a genuine personal experience (sadness, depression, elation). However, one can't help but feel that it is somehow "scripted," and when the author encounters something that is outside his expectations, he attacks -- and he attacks his fellow soldiers.
   
   A particular favorite is SPC Birmingham, whose opinions he invectively dismisses without the courtesy of indicating what they are or the reasoning behind them. If the chronology is accurate, it is apparent that the author judges and pigeon-holes his fellow soldiers within hours of making their acquaintance. The author appears disingenuous in that he often claims not to "point fingers" when he is clearly "pointing fingers!"
   
   Another thing that made this reader suspicious of the journalistic value of this work is the liberal use of inflammatory language. For example, rather than referring to the "enemy" there are repeated references to "savages" and "terrorists." The author leaves no doubt that he is ready, willing, and able to take the fight directly to the "savages." There is a clear message that he wants to mix it up, and kill these terrorists. According to the author, he is in top physical shape, an expert marksman, and knows what has to be done. One can't help but to wonder why he didn't opt for a stint in the infantry. The satisfaction that the author received from pulling the lanyard on a Marine artillery piece and taking care of the terrorists borders on perverse. The Marines that were actually doing the job did not appear quite as "thrilled" as the author, but then the author does not really seem to care what others think. Again, the author journals himself, rather than the situation, to the detriment of the work.
   
   The author's assignment as a broadcast journalist obviously demanded his presence at many events involving officers that would ordinarily not be attended by junior enlisted personnel. Furthermore, one could imagine there being a slightly less degree of formality in interactions with members of the officer corps under these circumstances; but the author gives the impression that he acted as their peers. Perhaps the most shocking was the author's attempt to embarass his CO in front of a junior officer. The CO had apparently offered the author a drink, and rather than being gracious, he "grabbed the arm" of an LT in order to show off that the CO was getting HIM a drink. If this is true, there is no wonder that his bosses, including the sergeant major would get on his case, but the author seems oblivious to the significance of these events; including being passed-over for promotion.
   
   "182 Days in Iraq" could be sub-titled "What NOT to do in the Army (a recruit's guide)," in that it documents the demise of a specialist who despite his good intentions for "getting the message out" in Public Affairs, instead took the "Army of One" slogan to the wrong extreme.



5. I, too, am a 46 Romeo, or Broadcast Journalist in the Army. I am on my second tour in Iraq with the 10th Mountain Division's 1st Brigade. I have read both positive and negative comments on Kiver. Although I do not know him personally, I can relate to his story. Sometimes you do feel like the smartest guy in the room when no one else really knows your job. This isn't to say that you are better or even truly smarter than the next guy, but I can tell where Kiver's feelings are coming from. You are the only one out of thousands on a FOB that can actually do your job. Yes, it can be both stressful and frustrating. I can tell you that being a Journalist in the Army is not as easy as it looks. I work 18 hour days and find myself many nights locked away trying to finish the next big Army project while other soldiers (both combat arms and combat support) are out playing cards or the newest X-Box game. I hear soldiers complain about a 12 hour work day. For Army Journalists, especially broadcast, the day is long - whether inside or outside the wire. I have respect for all soldiers, but "Sam" - please do not tell these people that Army journalists do not actively engage the enemy. That is an outright blanket statement without much research because I, and many of my Army counterparts, have been actively engaged. You can take that to the bank. To Kiver - at least you got your story out there man, no matter what anyone says. Hearts and minds, right? You may or may not be as egotistical as these people say you are, but you are what your environment has made you. For the Army, sometimes you have to be a little strong in the ego to deal with everything going on. I completely understand brother. God Bless.

No comments about Sergeant York's Own Story.

5 comments about Caesar: A Biography.

1. It's very historically accurate and has a wealth of information that will keep you longing for more on the great dictator and his infamous civil war against the SPQR. However, as tends to be the case with many historical non-fictions, the book is slightly wordy, which disrupts the flow of reading. I would definitely recommend it, but only to those who already have a background understanding of the socio-political environment that was Rome c. 1st Century B.C.



2. Christian Meier's biography presents the facts of Caesars life and does quite a bit of analyzation as he asks why Caesar did some of the things he did. For instance, Meier answers the age old question of why Caesar crossed the Rubicon, by suggesting Caesar was orced by the Senatus Consultum Ultimum making him an enemy of the republic, but he does note it still took some vanity to ignite a civil war on his own behalf. Meier provides good insight into the life of Caesar, but the book overall is a bit of a dry, scholarly read. If you want to get into Caesar's head and dont mind the dry prose this book is for you.



3. Negatives first: Trying to reach conclusions about the psychology of a person who dies over 2,000 years ago is a dubious enterprise. Use of descriptors such as alienation or "outsider" is a 20th century psycho-jargon. (Maybe in the original German it's more palatable.)
   
   Positives: Explaining the differences between present day political conception and those of the Roman Republic is most useful. The absence of political parties and "-isms" in the modern sense is one. Pointing out and the unity (in the Roman mind)of the state and society versus our contemporary conception as separate is another. The Roman senate was a legislature without a corresponding judicial and executive institutions. The senate attempted to be all three and largely succeeded until the the size of the Republic became to great. A power vacuum was created which resulted in a series of "big men", Pompey, Caesar, Antony, Octavian, etc. Caesar was the most interesting and possibly the most pivotal. A major historical thread of the next 1,800 years was seeking the resolution of this problem.



4. So what more can be said about Caesar? That was the first question I asked myself when I looked at this book. The cover stated that not only Caesar was the main character in this book, but also his age. And that's exactly what makes this book special.
   
   It's easy to pass a judgement. But what about the circumstances, beliefs and culture one is in? Caesar's age is described in great detail, starting over a hundred years before he was born. You will almost think you're reading about Rome in the beginning, but this all sets a great stage for the main character to enter.
   
   When Caesar himself comes into play you will get to know several 'Caesars' throughout his life. The man is being changed by his environment, beliefs and experience and acts on these changes accordingly. There is no question of good or bad, Meier only addresses the why, and that is a good thing to do.
   
   All 500 pages are worthy every dime and I would recommend this book to anyone. Compelling, adventurous, morally complex and great to read.



5. If you are troubled by insomnia, by all means buy this book. Put it on your night stand and you may find that it will solve your problem. However, in the end you may prefer pills. The author may well be one of the leading experts on ancient history as the book jacket claims. He is a professor at the University of Munich. But one thing is for sure - he is never at a loss for words. A specialist may enjoy reading all of his long winded questions, his endless pros and cons, and his speculations, but I did not. I labored through the roughly 500 pages and, at the end, felt nothing so much as relief and deliverance. Unless you really relish an expert's pontificating and moralizing, I would suggest that you can easily skip the first fifty pages and maybe the first one hundred. However be forewarned, that is only the beginning. There is more of the same - lots more.
   
   I slogged through it all, but I did not feel that I had learned very much, beyond the fact that the author is anything but a fan of Julius Caesar. He beats the reader to death with his "inside-outside" theory, his moralizing and philosophizing, but there is very little in the way of hard facts or substantive biography. To be sure, there may be very little information on Caesar's life still extant; however, one still has to contend with some five hundred pages! And I was struck by the fact that there are no foot notes and it is necessary to wait to the first afterward before the author condescends to let the reader know about some of his sources. And in the second afterward, the author admits that he has discovered a salient piece of evidence which tends to put his view of Caesar into question, but immediately denies the importance of same.
   
   I am not an expert on the subject at hand or the period, but for my money the author asks too much. He seems to expect that the reader will simply accept his view of Caesar. Rather than admit that he simply doesn't know something, he continually speculates, guesstimates, and assumes that the reader will be convinced of his conclusions, vague though the latter are. I suspect that the author has lived too much in the shadow of Hitler to render an impartial estimate of Caesar. Even if Meier is 100% correct, there is the little matter of Caesar's legacy. Little things like the fact that the French and the Spanish speak a romance language today (and the Germans do not). Or the fact that all of his successors used the title of Caesar and that it continued on into the German and Russian Empires of the Kaisers and Tsars. Or even the fact that our calendar today is his revision and known as the Julian calendar. The author does, at one point, grudgingly concede that Caesar was brilliant and may have been the greatest military commander in history, but he committed the supreme sin in Meier's eyes of failing to embrace the values of the Republic. (This while conceding that the Roman Republic was past saving.) While condemning Caesar for his brutality, and in spite of his many acts of clemency, he passes over Sulla's slaughter of thousands lightly, explaining that after all Sulla did it to help the Republic! According to Meier, Caesar, had no idea of how to solve the problem of a failing government other than autocracy - ironically, precisely the solution reached after his death and some fifteen years of civil war, by Octavius (Augustus). At least no known idea. In brief, I was not persuaded by the author's thesis. I would infinitely prefer a biography of Caesar if it could be written by Anthony Everitt whose "Cicero" and "Augustus" biographies are at least readable. Everitt is reader friendly. Meier is not.

5 comments about The Scariest Place in the World: A Marine Returns to North Korea.

1. Man... Talk about crabby... Everyone else who's reviewed this book so far here don't seem to be impressed. But I always enjoy James Brady's writing and this book was no exception. It's a memoir, of course. The underlying theme of the book is the march of time and how one looks back at -- or in this case, returns to -- a specific geographic place where youthful impressions were made, ideals died or changed... Where a young, unsure Marine officer discovered he did, in fact, have what it took to lead Marines in combat.
   
   Those looking for edge-of-your seat combat with Marines gunning down on-rushing human waves of Chinese infantry will be disappointed. This book is more like a love letter to youth and to the Marine Corps. And taken in that context, it's a fine book and a satisfying read.



2. The Scariest Place in the World by James Brady. Published by St. Martin's Press 11 April 2006. Paperback. ISBN 0312332432.
   $14.95US.
   The Scariest Place in the World is the latest missile by James Brady to remind the world that the Korean "Police-Action" should not be limited to a paragraph or two as in the recent history books.
   It was a "real" war, fought by "real" men, who "really" died leaving empty chaits at many a table around the world.
   The book is written speaking of the realities of war in a "tough-love", macho, politically incorrect style that will jar the reader awake causing them to remember those three years (1950-53) of warfare in which 37,000 American service men and women paid the ultimate price to stop the onslaught of communist aggression.
   Captain Brady tells of his indoctrination in the United States Marine Corps which contributed in forming the basis of his love of the Corps but more so the love of the men he served with, partied with and fought with.
   The book is a journey back in time, (remindful of "The Viet Journal" by James Jones), through the rigors of basic training providing backbround for stories for one's children and grandchildren that deserve to be told.
   There are biographical sketches of Senator John Chafee, Maurice "Mack" Allen, John Fitzgerald, Nathaniel "Taffy" Sceva, et.al., which are written lovingly as a tribute to the lives of these men and the women who loved and supported them. The memory of the funeral of Senator Chafee must have been most difficult to attend as it was a memory.
   The book is not devoid of humor as at times Brady's telling of an incident brought on a chuckle or two. But it would have had to been exerienced to understand the reason for the chuckle. In the same vein, a tear was shed at times by the memory stirred.
   The unabshed emotion(s) of the author are as open as any I have read. Brady doesn't mask his love for his compatriots-in-arms, expressing his love not for dramatic flare, but to tell them and the world "This is how I feel and it is also the Raison d' etre for the book".
   James Brady dedicated the book to all who fought in Korea and provided to those who will not make the journey back a return from the comfort of an easy chair.
   It is an easy read and thoughful. Try it!



3. As a previous reviewer I thought that Brady's book would be more of a focus on the DMZ and perhaps show some insight into "the scariest place." I did enjoy his war time reminiscences but that wasn't why I purchased his book. I didn't particularly care for his 'how he belatedly was awarded the Bronze Star,' and chumming around with colonels and generals at galas and such as it sounded like 'how great I am after all.' Oh, and by the way, Senator Chafee was my CO. I got tired of Mr. Brady selling his earlier pub,"The Marines of Autumn" (which is a fine read) but in particular I did not like him pimping (perhaps a bit too strong) his "The Coldest War." There are sections of the book where he cites this book seemingly every other page. After awhile I started to feel a bit sorry for Mr. Brady which is too bad as I'm sure that he was a fine officer for his Marines of Dog Company. It's an ok book for what it is but it really isn't about "the scariest place."



4. I loved this book. I served in Korea with USMC during the exact same time frame. It brought back many memories



5. I bought this book as a xmas present for my grammpa, he was a marine who fought in Korea the same time the author did....He is half was through it, and he is really enjoying it. Can't say enough good things about it!

1 comments about Okinawa Odyssey.

1. Superb book; "Leading a platoon is like a plate of spaghetti. You can't push the noodles forward with a fork; you have to pull them from the front." This explanation of tactical combat leadership was made by Brigadier General Easly, ACG US 96th Infantry Division in WWII on Okinawa. Easly practiced what he preached; he was wounded twice by sniper fire on Okinawa, the second time mortally. The author served as a tank platoon leader on Okinawa in WWII. His book is an autobiography of his experiences. Imagine leading a tank platoon into combat for the first time. General Easly has just told you in simple terms how to lead your men. You do. As your tank penetrates into a Japanese defensive position, all heck breaks loose. Japanese weapons are firing at your platoon; suicide units armed with satchel charges are rushing your tanks, while you try to direct the action of your platoon and crew. Suddenly, you hear a bang and notice an antitank shell has penetrated your tank. You know this because you can see daylight through the hole it made in the armor. Bang; another hit. Your loader is screaming; that antitank round has just ripped off his leg. While you try to tie a tourniquet on your loader's stump, and load a round into the main gun with bloody hands, and give fire commands to your gunner, another round hits your tank. Finally, your gunner knocks out the antitank gun. You and your men bail out under enemy fire and exit the action on another tank. This is your first taste of combat; there will be many more. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED BOOK ON THE US ARMY and ARMORed COMBAT in the Pacific. Superb; you won't be able to put it down. As a former Marine infantryman, I salute your service to our country in one of the bloodiest battles in WWII. Semper Fi!