5 comments about Black Cadet in a White Bastion: Charles Young at West Point.

1. I've just finished reading this skillfully researched book about Charles Young's life. From his birth to parents with roots in Southern slavery to his graduation from West Point, it's a story that reflects a strength of character and purpose against the many odds of the time in which he lived. His struggle against the racism of the time is a story that begs to be told.



2. What an inspiring story! Luck, pluck and a narrow window of opportunity all lined up for Charles Young, a young African American teacher from Ohio, who knocked on West Point's doors in 1884 and found them open to him. I'm amazed that West Point enrolled Blacks in that period. But as historian and author, Brian Shellum, tells us in BLACK CADET IN A WHITE BASTION, for a short period after 1884, a few African Americans were accepted at West Point. Soon after Young graduated, the military school barred African Americans for fifty years!
   
   Shellum explains that Young struggled at West Point because of intolerance as well because of its challenging curriculum. But Young was a man who never gave up, depending on hard work, tutors, mentors, friends and family to carry him to graduation.
   
   The author outlines the challenges of writing about an individual whose color relegated him to a shadowy existence at West Point. Yet with some diligent and creative research, Shellum pieces together a biography of a hero who clearly became the Colin Powell of his time.
   
   I look forward to Shellum's next installment of Charles Young's extraordinary journey.



3. My book club recently read this insightful biography of Charles Young's birth through graduation from West Point with unanimous praise for Shellum's writing style and solid research. While many military bio's are dense and slow, this book reads with ease and quick pace. As two of our club members are alumni of The Academy, I was not surprised to learn from them that the descriptions of campus life and traditions were accurate and much the same for Young as those from late this century.



4. Most biographies are about extraordinary people who accomplish extraordinary things. But the story of an ordinary person who makes the most of everything he has can be even more compelling. This is why Black Cadet in a White Bastion is well worth reading. It is a tale of accomplishment through simple perseverance, not complex genius. Brain Shellum details the slave community of Young's birth, the freeman's community of his youth, and the West Point environment where Young struggled for social and academic survival.
   
   Charles Young lived a century before there were television ads selling the Army as the place where you can "Be all you can be." He was ahead of his time, and his story is an inspiration to anyone who seeks to follow in his footsteps, to overcome the odds against them. Author Brian Shellum performs a great service by portraying Young's faults along with his strengths so that we can fully appreciate how hard he had to work to earn his stripes.



5. There was a great deal to learn from a story that is over 100 years old. I was unfamiliar with the story of racism at the military academy and this thoroughly researched book provides a great deal of context and thought provoking observations that are useful today.
   
   The author is challenged with finding authoritative resources long after the trail has gone cold but does a great deal of first-hand reporting unearthing historic letters and photos.
   
   I understand there will be followups to this edition which should be a welcome addition to what appears to be a rather small bibliography on the subject.

5 comments about Warrior: The Legend Of Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen.

1. Not your typical Capstick book, this focuses more on the military wars and campaigns in Africa from a British poit of view.
   Still very interesting.



2. This is a very bloody book, but so was Africa in the 1890-1920 timeframe - A Post-Bellum backwater - and one wonders why the British or the Germans were there.
   
   The best passsages cover Meinhertzhagen as a leader of men - his boldness and his careful calculations, as an intelligence operative and officer - his gaining entry to a Russian fort is hilarious, and his observations of Post-Bellum Africa - where the slave trade has collapsed and the Boer War is over with.
   
   In the end, all things written and done by Meinertzhagen must be judged against his role as a British Intelligence Officer - his diary entries, his "ornithology", and his whereabouts and actions. The one true constant is his devotion and loyalty to the Empire and his empathy for the downtrodden and unjustly treated.
   
   The dispatch of men with "amateur" interests is an old, old ruse that reaches as far back as Aristotle's trip to Thessaly if not further.



3. Col. Meinertzhagen was one of the greatest warriors of his day, a Richard Burton, Lord Stanley and Lawrence of Arabia all wrapped into one. He was also a fascinating individual who was a big game hunter and at the same time a man who collected one of the greatest bird collections for museum use at the time. An expert therefore on birds and a jungle fighter against Leetow-Vorbecks Germans in German East Africa(Tanzania). He led Africans in many fights of the First World War and was most well known for leading secret British septerfuge missions against the Turks in Palestine, leading to the capture of Beersheba. In the 1930s he was an admirer of fascism but hated the Nazis for their racist policies. In the 1920s he was also a great admirer of ZIonism and claimed to be an essential element in the founding of Israel, a fact overlooked today. He was a great warrior and this book tells his story full of bravado. The book concentrates also on his big game hunting exploits, but it is afanciful account.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman



4. A very disappointing book - it should be subtitled "a mini biography of Peter H Capstick." Capstick is arrogant enough to think that the reader will be just as interested in him as the they are in Meinertzhagen! It is not well written as Capstick rambles off on tangents (usually about himself) at very regular intervals. He professes to be an expert where he clearly is not eg he disputes the well known fact that anti-malarial drugs can mask the symptoms of the disease.
   
   A great pity that a potentially interesting book has been spoilt by a self interested author!



5. An almost uncritical biography of the subject, and a shamelssly uncritcal preudo-autobiography of the author. All cited sources are in Meinertzhagen's own publications. Barely worth the effort of reading.

5 comments about Hemingway: A Biography.

1. Carlos Baker is generally known as the founding father of Hemingway biographical studies. His 1969 biography, "Ernest Hemingway: A Life Story" is the so-called "authorized" Hemingway bio and it was the first book of its kind to explore the author's life. All subsequent biographers owe a great deal to Baker and the seven years he spent producing "Ernest Hemingway: A Life Story."

   Calling Baker's bio the definitive bio of Ernest Hemingway is difficult though for several reasons. First of all, being published in 1969, the book is now outdated to a great degree. Second of all, a slew of other biographies have been published since 1969 and some are very formidable. Baker's book, in my humble opinion, is probably the most tediously researched biography of Hemingway. His "Notes" section is just over 100 pages.

   If I had to recommend one standard Hemingway biography, I would likely choose "Hemingway: A Biography" by Jeffrey Meyers. I have read many Hemingway biographies and in comparing them, the work of Meyers does stand out. He offers details not present in other bios and provides fine commentary on EH's literature. Meyers gets as close to definitive as I think one can come in a single book.




2. I'm going to return this book because the printing was so poor. The photographs are unrecognizable and the type is smearing and difficult to read.
   
   There is no place in #1 for a 0 or minus rating, but this volume is unacceptable.



3. Found this first edition at our annual library sale this year for $1. After reading the other review on Amazon I am anxious to read it.



4. Jeffrey Meyers' eponymous biography of Ernest Hemingway is, as some have made it, a saltier companion to Carlos Baker's masterful 1969 definitive authorized biography. Meyers is not overly adoring of his subject and gives us a different view of Hemingway. Still, although Meyers is grittier than Baker and manages to dig deeper into Hemingway's complex and contradictory personality, he is not gritty enough nor does he dig deep enough to displace Baker as the biographer nonpareil.
   
   And neither does he capture the reader's imagination. HEMINGWAY: A BIOGRAPHY presents Ernest Hemingway in surprisingly muted tones, especially considering the almost cartoonish excesses to which Hemingway could drive himself. This is a very competent and workmanlike biography. However, its pacing and voice are didactic and dry and its portrait of the artist lacks color. Like twenty other books about the man, HEMINGWAY: A BIOGRAPHY belongs on the shelf as part of a well-rounded collection, but can replace none of them.



5. Now being well into my fifties, being in good health, and financially sound I have had the opportunity to study my favorite author. I have already traveled to his old haunts in Italy, London, and Paris (Shakespeare and Co. Bookstore) but I needed more in the way of in a truly great biography.
   
   So I decided to buy the biography of EH by J. Meyers after this book was recommended to me by a EH scholar in Paris.
   
   Anyway, what I wanted was a book that would give me insight into what kind man EH was all about. Where did he get his passion and his energy? Did he have a temper? What did he drink? What hours did he keep? Why did his love relationships fail? When did his health go bad? Why was he so prone to accidents?
   
   This book that gave me more than his life's history and I think you will have a good read, too. BTW, Key West and having a go at deep sea fishing is next of my list of things to do. This is a buy!

2 comments about Two Souls Indivisible.

1. This is a poignant story about two pilots downed during the Vietnam war and ending up in the same POW camps. I read it because it was tauted as a book of over coming racism and prejudice. The idea of American racism was supposedly being used as a tool to demean the white pilot into submission by the Vietcong. Human nature never ceases to amaze me but it is hard to comprehend that two Americans in the dire straits of a POW camp would let something like the color of their skin hinder companionship, communication et. al., things in low supply at a POW camp apparently. The story is heartwarming and informative of a POW's plight. The actual racism issue is of no significance to me when it is put in perspective of what else was going on in the camps.



2. I found this to be a fascinating and inspirational account of how two men, and their compatriots used their determination and creative skills to help one another survive the ordeal of prisoners of war in North Vietnam for over 7 years. There is much to be learned from how these men responded to very adverse conditions.

5 comments about Hard to Forget : An American with the Mobile Guerrilla Force in Vietnam.

1. When I picked up this book for the first time I did not put the book down until I had finished the book. Steve and I met for the 1st time in 1966, I was an O&I spec4 working in S-2 in Bien Hoa and had known Col Bo Gritz he was Steve,s CO at the time and it was my job to provide MAPS and AO,s to A-301 and A-302 when they were at Bien Hoa. Years later at my 2nd reunion I met up with Steve at our Ft Bragg reunion and was proud to have known and served in SF with him. The book put me back 34 years and I remember the Black box incident and the unit being recognized for a job well done by Gen Westmoreland. Thanks for letting me know you Steve and May God Bless and watch over you and yours. Sincerely yours your brother John J Coppinger



2. I have read ,HARD TO FORGET, The book captures the smell of damp vegetation rotten in the jungle, the sweat burning your eyes, the rucksack straps digging into your shoulders and that ever-lasting ache, on your hips, from the the burden of the pistol belt. The apprehension and fear, of a too quiet jungle, resurface in your mind. Your heart beating so loud, you think, everyone hears it. The hunter waiting to become the hunted. To the men who fought in Vietnam, "HARD TO FORGET". will bring the memories, flooding back. The good memories along with the bad.The book also deals with the effects of the war on the men who fought it. The book shows the beauty of America along with her warts. One point the author makes is, Soldiers do not fight wars by mistake. Soldiers fight wars because of mistake by politicians. In the end only soldiers and their families pay the piper. "HARD TO FORGET"



3. This a book that is a must read for anyone wanting to know what it was like in Nam. Being an Ex-Ranger this book put me right back in there. I just couldn't put it down. It made me laught,and cry. yes us Rangers do cry, for the lost of a friend.

   Roadrunner 6 out




4. Leave it up to the Special Forces to make a mountain out of a molehill. The Blackjack Operations were daily insertions of team into and out of the field. The entire time, only 8 teams managed to stay over night in the bush. The team that went to find the Blackbox, simply walked through War Zone D (Not the VC Secret Zone) and found the box, went to an lZ and were extracted. No POWs, no fighting into a enemy base camp, like this author writes. All the "war tales" arounds these operations are just that - Tales. This book is FICTION. Read the U.S. National Archives on what these men failed to do and they could not RON (Remain Over Night) because they were scared of the dark. Always back in before sundown with a lot of shadow shooting. The 54 enemy engagments the author claims is as bogus as Mexican water. Don't drink it and don't believe this book.

   For a more honest book on what and who dominated this AO (area of operation) in Vietnam, read Don C. Hall's book, 'I SERVED.' These 220 Lurps kicked some serious butt and these SF have been jealous of this unit since 1967 along with a string of other "marginal units that could perform well."
   Check out i-served.com




5. Good news first; family, friends, and non-military should really like this book. Others like myself who are retired military, served in Vietnam (Pilot 192nd AHC 68-69), and have written a book about this war might question this author's intent. After "Kill Me If You Can, You SOB" came out, I started reading every book about the Vietnam War I could get my hands on. So far about half of them have screamed out, "I want to be in the movies." This is one of those books.

5 comments about Knight's Cross : A Life of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel.

1. David Fraser's "Knight's Cross" is a good book - it just isn't a particularly good biography. My hunch would be that most prospective readers are interested in learning about Rommel's legendary campaigns, especially those with the Afrika Korps, and this book certainly delivers on that account. Fraser is better known as a novelist, and his writing reflects that heritage. He keeps the drama high and openly professes his admiration for Rommel, both as a military leader and a man.
   
   As a biography, though, "Knight's Cross" fails to deliver much meaningful insight into the subject's true character. Rather than providing a deep and rich background on Rommel's formative experiences growing up in southern Germany, with his siblings and family, at school, with personal relationships in the army, the company he kept during the Weimar years and so on, Fraser instead relies on clichés and generalizations. For instance, the book is over 550 pages long, yet by page 50 Rommel is already a gallant and increasingly renowned 26-year-old infantry officer on the Western Front. The rest of the book reads like a military history with a central character, rather than a biography of a great man that happened to become a field marshal. Fraser only mentions parenthetically that Rommel had two brothers and a sister, and his relationship with his parents is left totally unexplored, as are his religious beliefs (which is particularly disappointing given the fact that so many of his future letters to his [Catholic] wife Lucy are laced with references to God's will). Instead, Fraser seems content to offer up his assessment that "Rommel was a Swabian [area of Germany he grew up in] through-and-through" (whatever that's supposed to mean) and then hurry on to the presumably more interesting topics of his later battlefield exploits.
   
   The above notwithstanding, Erwin Rommel is certainly a compelling subject for a full-length biography. Especially interesting was his unusual relationship to the two things that made him famous: armored warfare and Adolf Hitler.
   
   To many, Rommel is synonymous with blitzkrieg and the genius of the Wehrmacht's combined arms doctrine developed during the interwar period. Despite his association with the panzer force and his reputation for military genius, Rommel was an infantryman by training and was passed over for membership in Germany's elite General Staff system, a snub he never quite got over. His first hands-on experience with armored units only came, unbelievably enough, as a divisional commander during the invasion of France in 1940. He managed to pull off such an unlikely feat, Fraser suggests, thanks to the personal intervention of Hitler himself.
   
   Rommel's relationship with Hitler (and Goebbels) was close, although Fraser is adamant that Rommel was never a Nazi. The field marshal clearly supported most of the regime's policies, felt the war was just and attributed Nazi excesses to the Furher's leading acolytes, such as Bormann and Himmler. To Hitler, Rommel exemplified everything a German soldier ought to be: aggressive, courageous, indefatigable, and unpretentious. In return, Rommel was genuinely impressed with Hitler's accomplishments and abilities. It was a relationship based on mutual admiration that, strangely enough, ended with one being implicated in a plot to kill the other. Fraser does an admirable job in reviewing and assessing the evidence tying Rommel to the failed 20 July attendat and comes to the conclusion that he likely knew that something was afoot, but wasn't an active conspirator. Moreover, Fraser argues that by the summer of 1944 Rommel felt that a negotiated peace with the western allies was essential to save Germany from utter destruction, but that he also felt that the murder of Hitler was wrong and, if successfully carried out, was unlikely to be supported by the German army and people and thus unlikely to achieve its ultimate objective of negotiated peace.
   
   In closing, if you're looking for a fun and informative military history on one of the all-time greatest commanders, you'll likely enjoy "Knight's Cross." If, however, you're looking for a serious biography on a great commander in the mold of D'Este's biography of George Patton, for instance, you'll likely come away disappointed.



2. This book is very well written and covers Rommel's entry into the military and final end. The author makes every attempt to be balanced and objective when analyzing Rommel's tactical decisions, political views, and leadership style. What makes this book flow well is that the author ties in the world events corresponding to the same time in Rommel's life. This way, the reader understands how and why Rommel was directly impacted in his military decisions and actions.
   
   One key point in this book is how Rommel did not agree with Hitler's treatment of prisoners and unrealistic military decisions that caused many needless loss life and equipment. An example of the humane side of Rommel was how the author notes through his interviews, is that Rommel made very attempt to treat POW's, regardless of religion or nationality, as humanely as possible. Another example of Rommel's humane treatment of others would be that many of his British opponents and Italian soldier allies held Rommel in very high regard.
   
   One key area of interest is how Rommel, despite being loyal to Germany's supreme leader, questioned the very poor strategic military decisions being made. An example noted by the author is how Von Paulus and Rommel were both given orders by Hitler to hold at all costs and not to retreat. Von Paulus did not have to courage to defy Hitler and the debacle involving the destruction of the 200,000 German Army in Stalingrad occurred. Rommel started to retreat, then delayed for 24 hours before deciding correctly that to save his army, they would have to retreat. The author notes that Rommel in retrospect regrets not having completely disregarded Hitler and kept the retreat going, to save more of his soldiers to fight another day.
   
   This insight ties into other books where other senior German leaders, like Von Manstein, or SS General Hauser, began to disregard Hitler's extremely poor decisions to hold at all costs and sacrifice the lives of their soldiers in vain. Then of course, this book also is similar to other experiences where those leaders who defied their supreme leader and managed to save their soldiers or even managed to bring about victory, were later removed from command and replaced.
   
   Another good insight the author notes in Rommel's one weakness but was also a tactical strength was his aggressiveness. Sometimes it worked to his favor, other times it resulted in heavy casualties, like the initial assault into Tobruk. But always, he led from the front and shared the same dangers and risks as his soldiers.
   
   Overall, this book is very insightful into the life of one of the most dynamic and memorable leaders in World War 2. There are good lessons in tactical leadership and overall responsibilities of a senior leader.



3. This book is very readable for a biography. I have tried to read a biography of Teddy Roosevelt as well as one of Lincoln, and stopped partway through each. I don't like biographies, in general. This one, however, is an exception. It is a real page-turner, and yet also very informative and detailed. It could also be read by any high school or college students who wish to have a good, personal view of the German side of both world wars, and should definitely be read by anyone who will be entering the military as an officer.



4. David Fraser's book is an excellent piece of work on a topic that many others have attempted to address but few have succeeded: the life of Rommel, leader of the Afrika Korps.
   
   I have read extensively about the war in North Africa and of course about General Rommel. However, whereas many other biographers have glossed over some of Rommel's quirks (or ignored them altogether) Fraser looks at his career to explain how his leadership style developed. Where others have discussed Rommel's "frontline" leadership style and described it as pure genius and a natural adaptation to desert warfare Fraser puts it in context and illustrates how this style began with his days as a company-grade officer in WWI and continued during the invasion of France. What's more, Fraser discusses how this style had its weaknesses as well as its strengths and the unique environment in North Africa more often than not resulted in victory for him.
   
   I consider this the definitive biography of Rommel.



5. This book gives a good background on Rommel's life. I was hoping for more specifics on his battles with Patton and those after North Africa.
   Be prepared for an uneasy read.

5 comments about Grant (Great Generals).

1. Mosier has done something few historians are willing to do- he compares the achievements of U.S. Grant with other great generals, namely Wellington and Napoleon. He also compares Grant's eye for strategy with later developments in American strategic doctrine. I.E., the notion of overwhelming an enemy's forces with eye to destruction as opposed to capturing territory are direct descendants of Grant's strategy to defeat the confederacy.
   
   Mosier spends to much time on Grant's early career and not enough for a curious reader on his leadership of all Union forces post 1864. All in all- this is a great introduction to a great general. Mosier often draws the ire of military historians for his methods and his desire to write about the things that people really want to learn about (namely, how does Grant compare across time as a general?)- to often historians are unwilling to make any such comparisons. This is a great intro to Grant.



2. Have to concur that the book abounds in factual errors and this is a shame because the overall approach and observations about Grant's genius are sound. Mosier dispels the myth that Grant was a dullard at West Point (not challenged enough) or a chronic alcoholic-- more likely an "episodic alcohol abuser" who had it under control by war. Other points: Casualties were as great, and often greater, in the Napoleonic Wars but armies were made up of the dregs of society and most of the dead weren't missed--harsh but probably some truth in that. So Grant wasn't a "butcher" but all strata of society was now represented even in the lower ranks and, coupled with a literate society and a lively press, deaths shook the nation, especially starting with Shiloh. Halleck comes off even worse than in most works: he set Grant up for Shiloh. Anyway, the novice really needs to get his facts elsewhere--and some decent maps--elsewhere but should eventually read this book.



3. I wish that I read these reviews before purchasing this book and hope that a few will save their dough by reading this. Not only is the book filled with basic factual errors it paints such a saintly figure of General Grant that one would suspect Mosier is related. From the author's perspective, Grant is not only a genius but his alchoholism and depression were actually assets! U.S. Grant was an excellent commander, far better on the offense than on the defense but Mosier's treatment would lead one to believe that he won the war single handedly. Again, I urge you to save your time and money, and find a good copy of Grant's Memoirs.



4. In my humble opinion, while Mosier has written a book with interesting insights and conclusions about Grant's ability as a general, I feel that he got too much into analysis of his personality and why he did what he did. I say this because at the beginning of the book, Mosier admits that he does not have much information on Grant the man. So why draw all of these conclusions if you do not know much of the man's personality? Why not just instead analyze his successes and failures?
   
   Another point of contention I have are the lack of good maps. While Mosier does have some good descriptions of Grant's campaigns, there are not nearly enough maps to detail his Civil War movements.
   
   Granted, while I am a lifelong Civil War buff, I am by no means and expert on the period. However, I do believe readers will get more out of reading other titles on Grant, specficially: "Grant" by Jean Smith, "Grant and Lee" by JFC Fuller, or the titles by Bruce Catton (Grant Moves South, Grant Takes Command).
   
   Complaints aside, I do believe that Mosier has written a book that will challenge the reader to further assess Grant's ability as a general and president.



5. I admire Washington, Lincoln and Grant. While the former two have garnered numerous accolades, Grant has been unjustifiably denigrated personally (alcoholic, fool, depressed) and professionally (butcher). His presidency has been unappreciated. Mosier makes a persuasive case that General Grant was probably a genius. In the final chapter, he briefly discusses Grant's undervalued presidency. I would highly recommend two other brief succinct biographies one by Korda and another by Bunting both of which explore Grant's presidency.
   
   Mosier dispels many Grant myths. He was not an alcoholic in a medical sense. He was self-taught in algebra. He entered West Point which was one of the best educational institutions in the world. West Point entrance examination had a 50% failure rate. He graduated 21st in a class of 39 but 40 of them failed to graduate so he was in the top 25%. He was a good artist with a great 3-D vision which was essential for a commander during battle. He was a great horseman.
   In the Mexican war, Grant was a quartermaster who demonstrated tremendous skill in logistics. This experience was vital when he commanded the Union armies and he made sure his men got enough ammunition, food etc. He displayed tremendous personal courage during the Mexican war (riding away to get ammunition) and ingenuity (dragging cannon to a church steeple).
   
   Mosier compares U.S. Grant favorably with other great generals, namely Wellington, Napoleon and Foch. He finds Grant to be superior all of them. Without him, the North would have lost the war. Grant never lost a battle. Mosier defends Grant against charges of butchery by comparing Civil War casualties with those suffered by the British and French in World War I. Robert E. Lee said, "I have carefully searched the military records of ancient and modern history, and have never found Grant's superior as a general". Grant's magnanimity in victory is still an American tradition.
   
   The book contains some historical errors which other reviewers have pointed out and I will not belabor here. This prevents me from awarding 5 stars. I am happy to find a book that appreciates this good, decent, honest everyman, great general and undervalued president.

5 comments about A Time to Lead: For Duty, Honor and Country.

1. General Clark has written a book about his own life, about America and about leadership. Presumably, the project had begun as a presidential campaign biography but then was redirected somewhat when the decision was taken not to run for president this year. Predictably, then, the book is a bit of a hodgepodge, but, in the end, it works.
   
   Especially interesting for me were the insights into General Clark's own sometimes conflicting thoughts about the military that is so central to his life. I was struck by similarities to people who despite their deep religious convictions nevertheless must sometimes struggle with their spirituality. While Clark's overriding faith in and support for the U.S. military are unwavering, he has faced times in his life when he has agonized over whether or not American military power and soldiers are being used and treated properly (and if not what, if anything, can be done about it). It would be difficult for a thinking and feeling soldier to have come through the Vietnam experience as he did without having to work through questions of that sort. In reading these and other reflections, the reader observes Clark's humanity, caring, multidimensionality and depth. Leadership, we learn, is a lot about caring, and it means taking responsibility (and sometimes truly huge responsibility) for other people. General Clark takes that caring and that responsibility very seriously. There is nothing cavalier in this soldier's personality.
   
   As an admirer of General Clark, I enjoyed learning more about the man through his book. As an entrepreneur striving through inexhaustible challenges to build a strong and cohesive team and direct it to a collective goal, I found both leadership lessons and inspiration. As an American who is deeply concerned about the tragic direction in which our country has been led thus far into the new millennium, General Clark's book gives me reason to believe that America can do better and be much better led. It also offers substantial elements of a strategy for making both America and the world at large a more prosperous, peaceful and safer place.



2. Rather than rehash other reviewers' comments, let me refer you to pages 182 and 183, where Wesley Clark reports a warning he received from Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia to not have NATO become an occupying power in the Balkans because occupying powers "do not do well here." Instead, the dictator urged the U.S. and its allies to "treat people with respect." After the conversation, Clark reflected on his military and negotiating experiences and decided the principles of power politics among nations "had to be exercised through personal relationships. Ultimately, diplomacy wasn't about trade-offs; it was about persuasion. To succeed, you had to link the calculus of cost and benefits to charm, new opportunities and the promise of a better tomorrow. Success was 90 percent persuasion, backed up by 10 percent coercion." He adds: "If force was to be used, it was to be used only as a last resort, and even then alongside allies, if possible." As I finished reading this book on Oct. 20, 2007, a day when the Bush Administration's drumbeats for war with Iran continued to accelerate, I couldn't help but wish Americans had elected Clark or someone like him in 2004. I had the same thought in nearly every chapter of the general's combination biography and expression of lessons he's learned from going to war, listening to others, weighing alternatives and then making or recommending decisions. Listening and weighing alternatives before deciding is a foreign concept for the man Garrison Keillor refers to as "Current Occupant." I fear it will plunge us even deeper into the Middle Eastern abyss. Wesley Clark is an American treasure, and the nation should tap his wisdom, judgment and talents as soon as possible. We need leaders like him.



3. Given the book's fantastic title, I wanted to love--or at least like--it. But I couldn't. It reads like a "just-the-facts-black-and-white" chronology of Clark's life, which the authors tried to warm up and add emotion to using cut-and-paste poetic descriptions (out of character with the rest of the writing), too many empty words--like brave, courageous, warrior, hero--and awkwardly tacked-on "lessons" about leadership.
   
   It's clear Clark has more than enough credentials and experience to back up his admirable convictions; unfortunately, a memoir with an agenda is an ineffective format for expressing them. I suggest he'll make a stonger impact if he sticks to writing topical essays backed up by personal experience.



4. With all of the failed leadership going on in America today I found Wesley's book refreshing. I'm encouraging my two sons to read this book because Mr. Clark is a Great leader to look up to and learn from. If we had more leaders like Wesley, America would still be a great country.



5. A TIME TO LEAD: An attention consuming narration of deeply studied soldier's experiences. General Clark projects a timely view of global political geography and the thrills of war action as if on a giant IMAX screen. He does so with appreciation-filled details commemorating all -- the fortunate survivors, the fallen, the injured, and the suffering civilians.
   Surely, we, the citizens protected by millions of the military's tedious work hours dedicated beyond gun battles to stopping violence and building consensus, have a cornucopia of reasons for being proud and supportive of the United States military. Perhaps, we can support it best by taking fair and peaceful footsteps in our personal pathways.

3 comments about Matthew B. Ridgway: Soldier, Statesman, Scholar, Citizen.

1. First of all I can say that I am a great admirer of Matt Ridgeway. The book is overall exceptional well written but lacks the personal sense that Carlo D'Este put into Patton: Genius for War. It seemed that the author has a title for each chapter then expanded this based on topic. A chronological order to Ridgeway's history would have made the book more substantial.



2. I have to respectfully disagree with the previous reviewer's take on this book. While the book is choppy at times in the way that it is formatted, it is still a very good biography.
   
   The previous reviewer stated that it was disappointing because it did not compare to Carlo D'Este's biography of George Patton ( A Genius for War). However I do not feel that this is a fair comparison. How many military biographies can compare to this classic?
   
   I think that this book should be judged on its merits and in my opinion; the author does a good job of telling the life story of this great American General.
   
   Each chapter is dedicated to a certain section of Ridgeway's life; Korea, Joint Chiefs of Staff, etc and while at times this does make the book seem choppy, it still is a pretty good book if you want to learn about Matthew Ridgeway.
   
   One last note about the book, to his credit the author George C. Mitchell does manage to accomplish something very important when writing a biography. It left me wanting to know more about the subject and read more about Ridgeway's life.
   
   I definitely recommend it if you are looking for a good introduction into Ridgeway's career and life.



3. Through correspondence and telephone calls, Matt Ridgway and I became friends. I attended his 85th birthday party in Pittsburgh, with all of his old General-staff from WWII and Korea. he was still 'flint' at 85. Matt talked Ike out of entering Vietnam (IndoChina) in '54, and convinced JFK that it could not be won. this is a wonderful book about a man who lost his beloved son, Mattie (age 20) and rather emotionally imploded after that. Incidentally, I presented him with 'the book' that saved his life in Korea. It was a paperback, with a 50-caliber shell sticking about 3" out either side. Matt is beside me in the photo and howling. "Penny, I know you want this book that brought Matt home to you." It was title: "Hot Army Nurses". The room went up in laughter. Great man...great book....Marshall called him "the finest soldier who ever wore the uniform'. davegwinn@aol.com

5 comments about ...and a hard rain fell (20th Anniversary Edition).

1. I don't have any way to know with certainty how much of the content of this book is a true and realistic recounting of what actually happened to the author and how much may have been exaggeration or fabrication or stories borrowed from others or drug induced distortion. It may all be 100% accurate and straightforward. But, there have been many documented cases of Vietnam stories that were far from accurate and it wouldn't surprise me a bit to learn that this is another one. Maybe I'm just an unreasonable skeptic, but an awful lot of it just didn't seem credible.
   
   In any event, if it's all true or not, it's a sad and disturbing story of a draftee who must have had many bad experiences. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone other than possibly someone looking for shock value.



2. This book is well written, captivating, balanced, and fair. I highly recommend it to anyone of any age with a brain - and the ability to use that brain to think for themselves. You don't have to agree with Ketwig to learn from his experiences - but the lessons are there.
   
   Ketwig has written an outstanding book that contains much more wisdom about life (way beyond just The Nam) than the simple memoir it purports to be. Those who want to feel better about the Vietnam war say disparaging things about Ketwig. But do they say his experiences are misrepresented? No - they just don't like the way he REACTED to those experiences.
   
   I wonder why not? I wouldn't want to sleep with rats and scorpions. I wouldn't like to see US war supplies sold on the black market by opportunistic, self-dealing traitors within our own ranks. I wouldn't like to see children maimed by napalm. I don't understand how other reviewers (supposedly intelligent people) can write such things off as mere "inconveniences." Does patriotism and duty require us to turn off our brains and accept mutely everything that is thrown at us by every situation? We can love our country and the American people and still find ample fault with the irresponsible and myopic fools who run the place.
   
   Ketwig tells us what he felt as a participant in a ridiculous, ill-conceived war. As an American he is entitled to his opinion. As an American who served, he is MORE THAN entitled to his opinion. If more people read "...and a hard rain fell," perhaps we wouldn't find our country repeating the same sad, unnecessary sins of the past -and permitting today's clueless "leaders" to send the poor and the disadvantaged to fight battles for the rich and pampered who populate Congress - and the oil companies and the defense contractors who own them.
   
   I am proud to be a Marine. Yet I am also very comfortable exercising my hard won right to confront and discuss the ugly horrors and realities of war - and not rationalize or bury such things because other Marines and servicemen died. Ketwig does a great job describing the lunacy of military bureaucracy and the stomach-churning frustration it causes. Good for him! Can ANYONE who has EVER served in the armed forces deny that the US military is the epitome of inefficiency and bureaucracy at its very worst? Really, let's be honest - as Ketwig has been.
   
   Reading this book can help prepare the next generation for the uncomfortable but real dichotomies that await them wherever they may go - whether it's the military, Corporate America, or the local union office. All organizations are run by people who generally say one thing to rally the troops and get elected/promoted - and then do the polar opposite to ensure that their personal ambitions are met and their pockets well-lined, whether such actions support their constituents or not. This is a timeless lesson that too many people learn way too late in life - if at all. Ketwig helps the reader shorten that learning curve.
   
   My late father, a decorated veteran of Korea, told me he'd gladly fight in the next war - just as soon as the Congressmen who declared it (or their own children) took the lead and led him into battle. He died knowing that this silliness would NEVER happen. The staff sergeant who ran my platoon, a Medal of Honor winner, confided the same attitude to me. Was he a dope-smoking shirker like some accuse Ketwig of being? No - he was a freakin' bona fide war hero - but a war hero WITH A BRAIN. The dirty work of war, as he and my father clarified for me, is the province of, as the late Leona Helmsley might have said, "the little people."
   
   Ketwig helps us all understand the misery and ultimate futility of war. How can that be a bad thing?



3. Don't be misled by this book. It's not the story of a combat veteran reflecting on the horrors of war. Rather, it is the story of a narrowly-focused guy "in the rear with the gear" complaining, endlessly, about the manner in which the war inconvenienced him.
   
   In addition, the book is very poorly written. What Ketwig did was tell the fairly boring and un-compelling story of his military service and supplement it with a witless history of the war and a number of stories that are most likely apocryphal (his basic training stories and Special Forces tales are undoubtably make-believe...I am sure that anyone with some initiative could discover that there was no basic-training "suicide" at the fort he trained at in the manner he described) in order to spice-up an exceedingly dull tale.
   
   Furthermore, there is something obscene about reading a litany of complaints from a rear echelon soldier when one considers that, not far from his boring but relatively safe posting, men were facing mortal danger. This is especially true in the case of Ketwig, who is myopic in the extreme when it comes to what he "suffered."
   
   I will give Ketwig some credit for his unintentionally comical sketch of his unrequited love for a prostitute. That kept me in stitches for a while.
   
   In closing, this is not an attack on Ketwig's politics. Indeed, there are a number of excellent books by anti-war combat veterans (Tim O'Brien for instance). My complaint is that for one to read Ketwig's book to get a feel for the war is akin to learning about sex from a voyeur.



4. Served in RVN at the same time and this book is not how it was. Don't bother reading it.



5. I bought this book because I thought it was a first-hand account of what it was like to fight in the Vietnam war. But no, it's nothing more than the account of an army mechanic who wrote a book so others can feel as sorry for him as he did for himself for being inconvenienced by a war he disagreed with and (apparently) never understood.
   
   Ketwig only breifly is ever in danger during his short stint in Vietnam. Unless, of course, one considers mud and spiders and bugs and rain a danger. Oh the horror!
   
   He finds more "danger" when he falls in lust with a prostitute and asks her to come back to America with him, only to learn later that she was (surprise!) telling him what he wanted to hear. It's a lucky break though, as this event provides the author with yet another opportunity to feel sorry for himself and once again serenade the reader with his sad-sack rendition of "poor, poor pitiful me."
   
   Was the Vietnam war unpopular? Yes. Did the bureaucrats in DC screw up our chance to win it? Definitely. But many brave soldiers fought and died for America in those swamps and jungles, and most did it without feeling sorry for themselves. Ketwig seems to believe it was all a grand conspiracy to interrupt and inconvenience him personally.
   
   There are many good books about our brave men who fought in Vietnam. This is not one of them. Don't waste your time.