3 comments about Arabian Knight: Colonel Bill Eddy USMC and the Rise of American Power in the Middle East.

1. At the beginning of "Arabian Knight" a State Department official is quoted as saying that "Bill Eddy was probably the nearest thing the United States had to a Lawrence of Arabia." I have never had a high opinion of T.E. Lawrence, based on his numerous self-promotional actions; his openly racist statements made in his "classic," - "Seven Pillars of Wisdom;" to his essential dishonesty, as confirmed by historians such as David Fromkin. Based on the excellent biography of Eddy by Lippman, I would consider such a comparison an insult to the memory of Eddy, who was the antithesis of so many of Lawrence's character flaws. The one characteristic they shared was an outsider's perspective on Saudi Arabia during its formative period.
   
   Bill Eddy was born in Sidon, Lebanon, in 1896, the son of missionary parents. He became fluent in the street Arabic patois of his childhood playmates. This was one talent that served him well throughout his life. Upon his death in 1962, he was buried in a cemetery in Sidon, and along with his family members, are the only non-Arabs buried there. Eddy's life was eventful, with several key junctures with critical points in American history.
   
   For the first 100 pages Lippman establishes Eddy's bona fides as the quintessential American patriot and man of action. Immediately after graduating from Princeton in 1917, he joined the Marine Corps, and saw action in the battles at Belleau Wood and the St. Mihiel salient, in France, in the First World War. Towards the very end of the war he was struck down by the Spanish influenza, which killed more people than all the casualties in the "Great War." As a result, he almost died in an American military hospital; he ultimately recovered, but walked with a limp for the rest of his life. After the war he spent some time at the newly founded American University in Cairo, but eventually accepted the position of president of Hobart College in New York State for family reasons. He spent much of the inter-war period there, but tired of managing academic squabbles, and returned to Cairo, in government service, just prior to WW II. As an intelligence officer he was soon posted to Tangiers, in Morocco, which Lippman says had much of the intrigue and duplicity that were depicted in the movie "Casablanca." The author states that based on Eddy's intelligence assessments, delivered personally to the Allied High Command, Operation "Torch", the invasion of North Africa in 1942, was given the go-ahead.
   
   The core of the book is the next 100 pages. While WW II still raged, the political leadership in Washington was formulating the structure of the post-war world. One component of this would be to recognize the importance of the Kingdom, as oil wealth would help transform it from one of the world's poorest countries. Eddy was sent to Jeddah in 1944, as a "Special Assistant" to the American resident. His Arabic language ability was an important component in establishing a good working relationship and friendship with King Abdul Aziz. But so to was a basic attitude of treating "the natives" in a manner of equality and respect, unlike numerous of his compatriots. Eddy was the sole interpreter, trusted by both parties, when President Roosevelt met King Abdul Aziz on the USS Quincy, on the Great Bitter Lake, in the very waning days of the war. Eddy was one of the most effective advocates of the mutual benefits of a strong American-Saudi relationship. He was again tapped to be the American who would establish diplomatic relationships with the most reclusive area of the Arabian Peninsula - the Yemen. In 1946 he went to San'a to meet Imam Yahya. It took him three weeks to cover the 100 miles from the coast by horseback.
   
   In the bibliography Lippman fittingly lists Dean Acheson's "Present at the Creation," an appropriate theme for Eddy's life. Not only was he a driving force behind the creation of a strong American - Saudi bilateral relationship, he was also a central force in the creation of the CIA from the components of the OSS, the organization he worked for during WW II. The later part of the book covers the bureaucratic fighting in Washington, which Eddy participated in, that established the CIA. Since Eddy preferred, and felt he was more effective, not working as a self-promoter, but as a man of reticence, it was difficult for Lippman to determine the full extent of Eddy's role in the overthrow of the democratic government of Syria. This coup, along with the CIA's overthrow of the democratic government of Iran, in 1953, could have been explored further by Lippman, to underscore the continued mistrust of the American government by the peoples of the Middle East, and why inquisitive Americans are often accused of being in the CIA.
   
   Eddy was also an advocate of the Arab point of view concerning the creation of the State of Israel. Lippman does an admirable job in negotiating this sensitive, emotional subject with as neutral a point of view as possible. I felt he failed only once, when he said: "The Arabs, by clinging to their absolutist position and refusing to yield any land to the Zionists, forfeited the political high ground, to their lasting detriment." (p228) Clearly they had already yielded much land, and had accepted substantial immigration; they simply did not want to become a minority in their own country - an issue on a far lesser scale that concerns Americans today about immigration into their own country. By in large, having lost this struggle for influence, Eddy and his family retreated to his origins - Lebanon, where he worked for Aramco, and almost certainly the CIA, to the end of his days.
   
   The book has a stellar graphic design, essential maps, numerous photos from Eddy's life and a solid bibliography. Lippman has done a wonderful service in writing an excellent biography on the life of one American who was deeply involved in numerous important events in American history - from the Western Front of WW I, to Operation Torch in WW II, to the establishment of the American - Saudi relationship as well as the creation of the CIA. It is an essential read for anyone exploring those "present at the creation" of the current world.



2. As a former Eurocentric American, this book is a terrific introduction to what often seems our love/hate relationship with the Middle East. With striking, straight-forward prose, Thomas Lippman makes history a personal and urgent proposition for every reader. Lippman breathes life into this history through the compelling human story of Colonel Bill Eddy. As a reader, I particularly admire the portrayal of Eddy's vigorous and astute role in defining relationships with Saudi Arabia, and later, his work during the Truman administration to create a viable and autonomous intelligence community. With ARABIAN KNIGHT, Thomas Lippman truly delivers to the reader a remarkable story of an American writ large in the world.



3. An apt conjugation of author and subject makes for a revealing work on the bases for the United States' position in the Middle East. Lippman is a former Middle East bureau chief of the Washington Post and author of four books on the interrelated topics of the Arab world, Islam, and American foreign policy as well as a regular commentator on today's swirling, often violent and threatening developments in the Middle East. His subject of U. S. Marine Corps Colonel Bill Eddy was born in Lebanon, spoke fluent Arabic, fought in World War I, and was a noted scholar of English literature. During World War II, he served as a spymaster in North Africa in preparation for the Allied landings; a role which gave him position and influence in the formation of the CIA. From his incomparable experience and position, he facilitated the historic meeting of F.D.R. with Saudi Arabia's King Abdul Aziz in 1945. This meeting was a cornerstone for the wide-ranging developing and the complex current situation of the U.S. in the region.
   
   Eddy's unique blend of roots in the Arab world, talents and interests, and commitment to the United States made him invaluable in the critical circumstances and often deceptive appearances of the Middle East in the World War II era and its aftermath. After World War II, American foreign policy people and politicians focused on the Soviet Union and the related spread of Communism as the greatest threat. As early as 1947, however, Eddy advised that it was not the spread of Communism which should be the greatest concern in American relations in the Middle East, but the "rise of Islamic militancy." These are Lippman's words for elements Eddy identified in countries across the Middle East; which elements have come to be termed "Islamic fundamentalism" especially as manifest by jihadists. Believing Israel would be defeated by an alliance of Arab states, Eddy cautioned U.S. policymakers against a hard and fast identification with the fledgling Jewish state. While his belief that Israel would be militarily defeated was wrong, his broader views about the damage to the U.S. position and interests throughout the Middle East and emerging Islamic militancy were prescient.
   
   The early years of Eddy's adventurous career in World War I and spying for the North Africa invasion are covered dramatically and concretely. Most of the text though (about half) covers his more involved and delicate work in laying the grounds for the meetings of U.S. and Saudi Arabia heads of state and subsequent developments in other parts of the Middle East and ensuing American politics and diplomacy. Thus Lippmann's biography is of particular interest to today's readers. Eddy's activities are like a window onto the origins of U.S. relationships and policies throughout the Middle East, especially centered on Saudi Arabia and oil. And as such, the activities shed much light on how the U.S. position has become undermined and how policies have gone awry or become counterproductive.

5 comments about For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War.

1. James M. McPherson's For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War aims to answer the simple question of what motivated the men who became solders in the Civil War to fight and die in this conflict. The simple answer according to McPherson was duty, honor, patriotism, ideological beliefs such as liberty and freedom, and religious beliefs. These ideals or ideas are pretty much the same motivating factors soldiers from other wars in the 20th Century or those historians of ancient wars give to explain why they fought and died. McPherson certainly did his homework by reading twenty-five thousand letters and two hundred fifty diaries from soldiers to come to his conclusion that it was truly duty, honor, patriotism, ideological beliefs in liberty and freedom, and religious beliefs that motivated these men to fight and die in the Civil War cause. As a reader I was hoping for something more or different than the tired and tedious five reasons that every soldier indicates as motivating factors for them. There is not a dispute that these five factors are for the most part true. The excerpts from the letters indicate these five motivating factors over and over. Even though these were excerpts and pulling text out of the original context of a document can significantly change its meaning, for the most part the excerpts painted the picture that supported McPherson's argument that, "Yet for Civil War soldiers the group cohesion and peer pressure that were powerful factors in combat motivation were not unrelated to the complex mixture of patriotism, ideology, concepts of duty, honor, manhood, and community or peer pressure that prompted them to enlist in the first place." (p. 13)
   
   The reading of For Cause and Comrades felt as though it was another book that put soldiers and war up on a pedestal of what a great sacrifice soldiers gave to their country by participating in the horrors of war and akin to a child's hero worship. For Cause and Comrades also seemed as though it was reiterating the tired and worn out American patriotic themes of liberty, freedom, duty, honor, and religion. The book generated visions from daily life on par with "The Few, the Proud, the Marines" commercials on television to recruit soldiers, or popular mass media inundating the masses with typical American ideology such as Superman standing for truth, justice, and the American way, or another person who feels a particular generation was the "Greatest Generation" above all others. Watch out Tom Brokaw, McPherson feels Civil War soldiers out does any other group of soldiers including your beloved World War Two soldiers in the area of duty, honor, patriotism, freedom and liberty loving, and devotion to a higher power. McPherson did mention through the words of the soldiers that war was a horrible affair, but then uses it to idolize these men in their accomplishment of overcoming adversity and "staying the course" instead of ever mentioning that war is lowest form and action of human existence and should be something to be avoided at all costs. A true hero is one that can solve problems without resorting to violence. A truly wise hero knows not only how to solve problems without violence but also knows that war that involves murder, gruesome mutilation, and destruction which result in unspeakable pain, misery, and suffering whether physical or the destructive psychological impact on soldiers and civilians of the society and is a course that should never be traveled.
   
   McPherson's expertise in writing about this subject is not disputed nor is his findings. McPherson has been a professor at Princeton University since 1962 and his entire academic career has been focused on many aspects of the Civil War era. He has been nationally recognized numerous times for his work in this field including receiving the Lincoln Prize for For Cause and Comrades. For Cause and Comrades has made an important contribution in historical research by giving a voice to people who can no longer speak for themselves and illustrates their experience to give a more in depth well rounded picture of history. Futhermore, everyone is entitled to their own perspective and interpretation on any subject. Unfortunately, for this reader, it was filled with too much hero worship, idolization, and the standard tired historical interpretations of soldiers and war as being something someone does if they have a sense of duty, are honorable, patriotic, revere freedom and liberty, and are spiritual. These themes should stay in fiction such as stories of King Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable. People in the real world should find other avenues besides war to achieve the admirable qualities of duty, honor, patriotism, believing in ideals, and spirituality and it should be the responsibility of learned people to point that out instead of seemingly making war and people who fight in wars the pillar and standard for achieving all those admirable qualities.



2. ...well almost. In 'For Cause & Comrades' James McPherson has set out to explain exactly why the average soldier sacrificed so much for his respective cause in the American Civil War. He has succeeded in convincing me. As the backbone of his thesis, McPherson has used hundreds of letters and diary entries from both Confederate and Union soldiers that offer some glaring insight into their motivations and beliefs. He first touches on the more universal motivations of warriors such as honor, duty, comradery, religion, vengeance and so on. And while these all played a significant part in the Civil War, McPherson argues that what ultimately separated Civil war soldiers from those of most other wars was a fervent belief in the righteousness of their cause. In other words, this was a truly ideological war and these convictions of righteousness, on both sides, was what carried these men through such horrific fighting to the bitter end.
   
   While I can't say there were any shocking revelations here, I was slightly surprised, for instance, at how many Union soldiers were fervently dedicated to their cause. It usually goes without saying that the Confederate side was truly motivated to defend their cause, but I had always assumed that most Union men served out of a grudging sense of duty. It turns out that many truly felt that they were defending the American experiment as a whole from the despised "traitors and rebels." In fact, this seems to have been a bigger factor than slavery for most, as a large portion of Union men were just as racist as their Southern adversaries. Which makes it somewhat ironic that they felt they represented the cause of the entire free world against tyranny and oppression. It should be noted though that many Union soldiers did passionately oppose slavery and this was an equally compelling cause for them. The Union side seems to be very complex. On the other hand, the Confederate cause seemed to be much less complicated. They were fighting not only for the right to continue slavery, but also for their independence from the hated Yankee. As much as white supremacy was a chief motivator (even poor, non-slaveholders resented the notion of black equality), most Southerners truly believed they were fighting for their own liberty and way of life.
   
   Of course McPherson concedes that not every soldier fit this description. There are skulkers, dodgers, draftees, and otherwise reluctant soldiers in every army, but as McPherson shows, there was a significant core of truly ideological fighters on both sides who refused to accept anything less than total victory. While those well versed in Civil War history might not find anything new here, I found it to be a concise and convincing survey on Civil War motivations and I would highly recommend it.



3. This month marks the 147th Anniversary of the beginning of the American Civil War and the fight to preserve the union and end slavery.
   
   Any war, as a violent, organized explosion of human emotions, produces some very unnatural responses on the part of soldiers and civilians alike. James McPherson, undoubtedly now the preeminent American Civil War scholar has, in the words of his own introduction, tried to make sense of what was similar to other wars but also what was different about that experience for the soldiers on both sides of the divide in that war. Working from a plethora of soldiers' letters and other observations he has tried to explain why the citizen soldiers on both sides of that bloody conflict kept at it despite the grueling circumstances, including extremely high casualty rates.
   
   I make no bones about my partisanship for the Northern, Union and anti-slavery side in that conflict. However in war, and civil war in particular, one can note the attributes of bravery, honor and heroism of the opposing side without giving an inch on the political questions. If one thinks about it if one does not recognize those characteristics in the soldiers of the other side one places oneself in a very hard place. The Geneva Conventions, weak as they are, codify that understanding.
   
   McPherson goes into great detail about the phases of the war-the general bloodthirsty and energetic desire of both sides to get at it; the sobering effects of actual combat; the psychological traumas produced in men before, during and after battle. In short, the passion and anger that drive men to fight-and soldiers to reflect a bit afterward. He details the sense of patriotism, honor, manhood, shame and other virtues of mid-Victorian America that further drove these men. Probably his weakest part is an examination of the personal politics of the soldiers, although that may be, in part, a function of the fuzziness of their goals as they became overwhelmed by the other considerations previously listed.
   
   However, overall, McPherson more than adequately makes his point that many considerations entered into the calculations of those who freely volunteered for the citizen armies on both sides, fought tremendous and bloody battles and slogged on through thick and thin. I will stop here with one comment that struck me from a Northern soldier about his reasons for fighting. Admittedly this soldier was a high abolitionist but here is what he said-" I want to be able to sing `John Brown' [John Brown's Body, the anti-slavery hymn and precursor for the Battle Hymn of The Republic] in the streets of Charleston [South Carolina]." Yes, I can, indeed, get behind that sentiment as a reason for fighting.



4. This book is mainly for academics and true historians. It's a short book, which makes it a quick read, but it's not as good as some of McPherson's other Civil War books. (like "Ordeal by Fire"). His thesis is that Civil War soldiers, both Union and Confederate, fought for three different reasons (or "motivations"). These are related to reasons why soldiers chose to enlist (enlistment motivation), to fight (combat motivation), and to stay in the service (sustaining motivation). The book seems pieced together to me and the chapters are not put in chronological order like most history books are. He uses so many excerpts from soldier's letters and diaries that it was hard for me to follow. Even though I understood his thesis, I did not like the book's style. I would give this one a pass unless you have nothing else to do!!



5. I was very satisfied with the level of customer service that I recieved from Amazon.com. I love the low prices and the customer service.

5 comments about Agent Zigzag: A True Story of Nazi Espionage, Love, and Betrayal.

1. A suposedly true story, but frankly it did not have much of a ring of truth about it. Certainly parts are true, but as much of the story relied on the writings of a con man, how much can one believe. It has that, after the fact ring, of the victors did nothing wrong and the vanquished did nothing right. The con man, if the story is to be trusted lived like a prince in both France, Norway, Germany and England fetted by all sides. Hmmm, Doesn't pass my litmus test.



2. Ah, the story of Eddie Chapman; long awaited and finally produced (actually two of them on the same day, but the thrust of "Zigzag" by Booth ruled it out for me.) I had read Masterman's "The Double-Cross System in the War from 1939 to 1945" which gave Chapman six pages, seen the movie "Triple-Cross", and wondered what the story really was. The movie bore no resemblance to the truth as usual, but finding out the truth in spy stories is always a realm where educated guess and conjecture must fill in the frustrating blanks. Chapman's story rings true in every respect and well worth the read over the 2-4 nights it provides.
   
   Earlier reviewers have exalted or condemned Chapman, so allow me to state that essentially all spies/agents have a screw loose and a yen for danger, excitement and feeling special. They operate with governmental assistance well above the law -- a heady role that must in itself be its own reward. Few if any spies for western democracies have been justly rewarded for their endeavors, as such rewards are generally denied under the rubric of maintaining security. Most ex-agents are relegated to obscurity and penury while some are "terminated with extreme prejudice" (killed) if they are considered as security risks. In this respect, working for a totalitarian government like that in the old USSR has its rewards, as they tend to resettle ex-agents in government positions. There is something about a democracy that makes a spy untrustworthy to the public and unworthy of its respect. As such, Chapman was no exception.
   
   Agent handlers or case officers are usually like Ryde, Chapman's last British handler -- bureaucrats playing it safe and willing to sacrifice their agents. The agents themselves are often despised for their courage and exciting lives -- things well beyond the capabilities of their handlers. In order to be successful, an agent must outwit the enemy and fend off bungled, misguided and often hostile actions by his "friendly" handlers. In Chapman's case he was under suspicion from both sides and faced dangerous situations that would have been insurmountable for a man with less larceny in his heart. That's what makes his case so extraordinary and improbable. But true.
   
   Yes, Chapman was a cad and a career criminal, but many agents feature a dark side. So do many heroes. The difference is that the agent operates outside the law to be successful, and the best training for such activity is survival in a criminal world. Ask any under-cover police officer.
   
   Other reviewers have made an issue about what Chapman accomplished. Few spies other than Burgess, Philby, Hollis, Alger Hiss, Ted Hall, the Rosenbergs, or Penkovskiy make a lasting difference -- even Richard Sorge's impact is disputed from the Soviet archives. Intelligence is made up from a number of small fragments or information, often obtained at great personal cost by unknown sources. And I'm not talking about a case officer like Valerie Plame who becomes a media darling without taking risks. Chapman was an real agent who risked his life repeatedly, made some contributions, and that should be enough. If the reader wants a story with great successes, he will have to look to stories of those traitors listed above who had unusual positions of access to information of particular value to another country. Not every agent saves the world, but many taken together just might. FYI, I was disappointed to see the author use the trendy term "mole", coined by John Le Carre, instead of the proper term "resident agent" that was in use until the 1970s.
   
   With respect to the danger Chapman faced in Germany, it should be remembered that a number of individuals were constantly seeking to discredit or expose him, and if any single one of them had been successful, his life would have been forfeit after a period of torture. I suspect that none of the complaining reviewers would be willing to undertake such risks. Perhaps this is the "Mission Impossible" syndrome whereby we have become conditioned to expect truly impossible feats as requirements to hold our attention.
   
   The author takes great pains to limit his presentation to facts that are confirmed through multiple sources rather than relying on Chapman. No doubt we all would have wanted more of the story, but with the available sources exhausted by this book, we will have to fall back on our own educated guesses and conjecture.
   
   Read the book -- you'll learn a lot about how human intelligence is obtained or not obtained. The author does a good job of research and writing, and if the outcomes are not what we would want -- well, then, that is our problem.



3. This book doesn't just cover the technical aspects of Eddie Chapman's double agent adventures; it uncovers the man behind the story. And he's quite a character. The author has done extensive research on all the people behind the scenes who represented the brains (and the humanity) behind Chapman's work - on both the German and the English sides. It also touches on the amazing contribution of the folks at Bletchley Park who deciphered the Enigma code. Enjoy!



4. First: what a character! Eddie Chapman, common criminal, daredevil, ladies' man, double agent extraordinaire recipient of the Iron Cross from Hitler, hob-nobbing with London elite...a blue-collar "To Catch a Thief" spy story.
   
   Second: a gripping can't-put-it-down tale, written like a great novel, chock-full of larger than life characters in larger than life circumstances.
   
   And, as it ended, I was sad that they're all gone...but enriched for having, through Ben Macintyre, known them.
   
   A great book waiting for the film that will do it justice.



5. Great story would make a terrific film. Jaw-dropping exploits combined with a cluelessness that's very engaging. A great read. I see Clive Owen as Agent ZigZag, 'cause he's a ladies' man, a funny guy (who thinks he's suave) and hysterical as a spy.

2 comments about The Ice Diaries: The True Story of One of Mankind's Greatest Adventures.

1. You might not think that an account of a real world event such as the first visit to the North Pole (and transit of the Arctic Ocean) with its outcome well known could be suspenseful and gripping. If so, you have not read "The Ice Diaries: The Untold Story of the USS Nautilus and the Cold War's Most Daring Mission" by William R. Anderson (the commander of Nautilus during that historic voyage) and Don Keith. Although the story has been told before, this time many previously classified aspects are explored in detail and perhaps for the first time the real nature of risks and daring are evident. Anderson and Keith describe the first two attempts to reach the Pole, both defeated by inexperience, faulty equipment, and sheer lack of knowledge of underwater Arctic conditions. But Anderson and the crew of Nautilus persevered and performed brilliantly to achieve not only reaching the Pole, but to cross all the way from the Pacific to the Atlantic in doing so. "The Ice Diaries" is a page-turner of the best sort. And it is pleasing to report that Anderson took great pains to make clear the contributions of everyone involved, although he remained modest about his own role. Fifty years afterwards, it may be difficult to realize what an extraordinary achievement it was, and the impact it had, both upon public opinion and on Cold War strategic thinking. The voyage of Nautilus from the Pacific to the Atlantic via the North Pole can justly stand alongside the Apollo moon missions as one of the greatest adventures of the Twentieth century made possible by evolving technology.



2. Having been blessed to be a crewman in US Nautilus on all three of her Arctic cruises, one in 1957 and two in 1958, with the last successfully gaining the North Pole, I'm familiar with all the details. However, it was such a pleasure to read our late skipper's recent and highly updated accounting of those wonderful days. Anderson's first book,'Nautilus 90 North', written just after the Polar trip of 1958 was also a great read, but of necessity, omitted much of the background information and intrigue that led up to all these trips, especially the 1957 trip. Capt. Anderson was one of the most remarkable and humble men I've ever had the privilege to know, and as was his nature, always put the interest of the crew and ship before himself. This is reflected in his writings and as I read 'Ice Diaries', I could hear his soft Tennasee accent speaking right off the pages. Anyone who has an interest in history, the sea, the Navy, or especially submarines, will enjoy this book. It is a complete accounting of our adventures across two years of under ice excursions and I highly recomend it. It should be on every school library shelf in the country. John C. Yuill

5 comments about Six Minutes to Freedom.

1. I rate this book right up there with my favorites "Endurance", "Touching The Void" and "Blackhawlk Down". I had a tough time putting this book down. Kurt Muse is one strong willed indivdual.
   Edmund Burke said it best with "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"



2. I had seen this book once in a book store and passed it up. From reading the description and review on [...] I decided to buy it. The book was well written and very informative. I knew of the incident, Operation Urgent Fury and the rescue of Muse, but knew very few details. My attention was held until the very end. Although somewhat limited or shrouded I especially enjoyed th details of the rescue and the rescuers. This is one of those books that just make you proud to be an American.



3. This book made me relive the fear and the anxiety most Panamanians experienced under Manuel Noriega's dictatorship.
   I believe that the book exagerates somewhat on the overall role that Kurt Muse played in the huge movement to get rid of the military regime, but the only clear error I found (very small if one considers the length of the book) is that Dr. Hugo Spadafora, who was horribly tortured and beheaded by Noriega's orders, had not previously been an anti-Sandinista guerrilla, as indicated in the book, but an anti-Somoza guerrilla.
   Another detail that I interpret differently is that I think that the permanent guard soldier who was ordered to kill Kurt Muse if an American invasion took place had just gone to the restroom when the rescue mission started, which I think was an answer to all the prayers for Kurt's life.



4. This is a true story of true heroes. Not only is Kurt Muse, the author and subject an authentic hero, the F Team of Delta Force Assaulters that rescued him from certain death at the hands of the dictator Noriega are authentic as well. Muse fought the dictator with creativity, wit and humor. F Team fought him with bullets and grenades.
   
   A measure of the man Muse is that on the anniversary of his rescue he calls each of his 23 rescuers on the anniversary of his liberation, to thank them and to update them on the life and family of the man they saved. A measure of the Delta operators is that even those gravely wounded returned to the service of our Nation.
   
   This is a political thriller with a difference: the story is true; only the names have been changed to protect the victorious from the revenge of the defeated. I have had the privilege to meet one of the Delta operators that participated in the raid on Modelo Prison; no finer friend can you have, no fiercer enemy if you're an enemy of our Nation.
   
   Read this book for insight into real people at the center of one of the geopolitical events of our time. It's not just history, it's humanity.



5. Almost from the first time I heard about Kurt Muse I felt that there was something missing in this story. Seeing him on television, watching a documentary about him, and reading this book, I felt that he was being disingenuous in his telling of it.
   If you see what the American government spent and risked to get him back, it's pretty obvious that he was a much bigger player than how he portrays himself.
   Compare the treatment of Kurt Muse against that of Tom Bleming, another American captured by Noriega (and told in his book, "Panama: Echoes from a revolution"). Beaten, starved, tortured, threatened daily with death, Bleming's incarceration contrasts so sharply with the treatment of Muse that you have to wonder if the fix was in.
   Bleming was captured by the very same people who grabbed up Muse, yet Bleming receives no mention by Muse, even though their times in captivity overlap.
   
   I've always felt that Kurt Muse was a C.I. A. agent, or at the very least, a contract employee. I know that he's gone to great lengths to deny it, but it's still there, like a bad odor in an elevator. You just can't get away from it.
   
   Bleming appears to have handled his captivity much better than Muse, and walked out under his own power. After Panama, he involved himself in other adventures, his latest being a guerrilla in Burma with the KNLA. He even wrote a book about that, "War in Karen Country".
   
   If I were to go off somewhere and involve myself in other peoples problems, i have to say that Bleming would be my first choice of companions, and Kurt Muse a distant second.

5 comments about In Deadly Combat: A German Soldier's Memoir of the Eastern Front (Modern War Studies (Paper)).

1. A few things stood out in this book,
   1. Bidermann was envious of how well the Russian soldiers were outfitted from boots, jackets, to weapons and trucks.
   2. By late 1941 the fighting was already tenacious in Russia.
   3. By late 1942 - early 1943 it seemed that the Russian air force was unopposed.
   4. On the eve of invading Russia, there divisions main source of mobility was either by foot or horse, and from the very beginning if they could acquire the enemies equipment they would because that was all that was available - Bidermann even commented how they preferred the Russain trucks (Fords via lend lease I am sure) because it was easier to get maintence parts - this was already standard operation by September 1941 ! !
   5. Several examples of how strict discipline was in the German army.
   6. Bidermann described VERY vividly the deprivations they lived and fought in starting with 1941. As one example - he wrote about how taxing it was to be out doors 24 hours a day for months - in the rain, mud, snow, heat, etc - always outdoors.
   7. When his unit entered Latvia he commented that he was finally in familiar surroundings as far as the farms/buildings and people. My parents are from Latvia, and even though we are not slavic, and embrace the west not the east, I found it interesting that an outsider could see a difference between the Russian landscape versus the Lavtvian.
   8. I have ready several German accounts about fighting on the eastern front, and they do mention fighting Bolshevism, but Bidermann is the first author that conveyed to me why the Germans fought so tenaciously in Russia once the war got under way. ( I have never come across a satifying explanation that compeled the comon Germans to attack France, Norway, Belgium, Greece etc.)
   9. In describing the hardship, heartache, fear etc.Bidermann is actually quite a good writer. He was not merely repeating events as he experienced them, but portrayed the experiences in a way that takes you there. I have recently read Tigers In the Mud, Black Edelweiss, Soldat by Sigfried Knappe, and Death Traps - all personal accounts, all books I liked and recomend, BUT Biedermann is the most taleneted writer.
   
   This book is a personal account which I very much enjoy reading about, but interspersed is also unit movements and the like. These sections are not too long, and I quickly skim over them because I am not interested in large troop movement type history. The book also had a map that was ok, but Bidermann mentions many cities where he was, but are not shown on the map. Also, the names of most cities in Latvia are the German version not Latvian, so despite being fluent in Latvian I have to do some studying to figure out where he is. For non- latvian speakers they would have to find a German-Laltvian translation.



2. There's not much more I can add to all of the glowing reviews for this book. I'm fascinated by WWII history and have read many accounts, and this is a rare and excellent look from the German soldier's point of view.
   
   I would have given it 5 stars but for one thing: the publishers have included only one map. This book needs many more maps to illustrate the remote locations and battles described by the author.
   
   Unfortunately, this is often the failing of too many historical books about various wars. This book has a single map at the beginning, illustrating a vast area from Finland down to the Black Sea in almost no detail. It is nearly useless for understanding the movements of the troops as described.
   
   I would strongly urge the publishers to include more maps for the next edition -- surely there will be one?



3. The book was originally written for the survivors of Bidermann's regiment and division, not for the general public. Bearing this in mind you will have a better understanding and feeling for the author's account of his experience of fighting on the Eastern Front during WW2. At times you might find the narrative old fashioned and even cliched but this is definitely not the case, it has to be taken in context of when and why this book was first written. This is a combination of a combat history of the 132nd Infantry Division and the author's role and experiences in the fighting on the Eastern Front. The author, Gottlob Herbert Bidermann, won the Iron Crosse First and Second Class, the Crimean Shield, the Close Combat Badge, the German Cross in Gold, the Golden Wound Badge (wounded five times), the Honour Roll Clasp and the Tank Destruction Badge. What is remarkable is that the author survived five years of combat on the Russian Front fighting in Crimea (in Manstein's legendary 11th Army), Leningrad and later in the Courland Pocket under the most attrocious conditions. I found his stories about his early years fighting with an anti-tank section using the Pak 37 "doorknocker" very interesting, I had always believed these weapons to be next to useless on the Russian Front however I was surprised. Generally, I found this book to be a very fascinating account of the fighting conducted on the Eastern Front from the perspective of a young German soldier. It offers some very interesting insights into combat and its effect on men who in the end just tried to survive against immense odds, but also some light moments which reveal the true character of the typical German soldier. The last chapters deal with Bidermann's imprisonment in various camps in USSR and the many hardships that the German soldiers suffered there. There is a number of absorbing black and white photographs supplied from private sources that give the book a human touch. The only real problem that readers may find with this book is the lack of maps detailing the movements and battles of the 132nd Infantry Division. Overall this is the sort of book that should be in the library of every serious reader or student of the war on the Russian Front during World War Two.



4. I loved reading this book. It is full of great stories of near misses and high adventure in the face of certain doom. This book was given to me by someone who thought it looked "boring" and it had been left to them when the former tenant moved and was not bothered to take it with them. Their losses were my gain. I will read it again. Personal accounts are always subject to mistaken remembrances, fantasizing, over-indulgences, etc., but this story still rings true. As the son of a WWII US army infantry veteran, I am sure that my father would have enjoyed reading this book. Thank goodness this information was resurrected and preserved.



5. If the narrative ended with the fall of Sevastopol, I would have given this book a 5. However, the last third of this memior had several problems. During the final agonizing 2 years fighting around Lenningrad and the Courland, Biederman attemps a few narrative gimmicks that I found confusing if not distracting. He jumps to the omnipresent mode for a chapter and gives the account of the Soviet fighters engaged in combat against his unit. At other times (mainly during the Courland fighting), he jumps and gives a high level account of the campaign from the point of view of the Army Group or Corps level. These gimmicks seriously detracted from the overall flow of the dramatic events that led to his capture and imprisonment.
   
   Yet, despite these failings, In Deadly Combat gives the reader a birdseye view of the common German foot solider who spent his entire time on the Eastern Front. There were no glorious panzer battles or dramatic climaxes to famous campaigns. For Biederman and the hundreds of thousands of other Gefrieters, Russia was a place of torment, danger, and death. Of the 12 men orginally assigned to his heavy weapons Pak squad, only Biderman and a comrade survived. Biderman doesn't mince words for the German equivalent of the REMF. Despite the evil nature of the regime he served, and the terrible pyschological scars he incurred, Biderman remained proud of what he and his fellow gunners endured. Like soldiers all over the world, he found true friendship and comradeship with the men he suffered with.
   
   The memiors open with his units deployment into Southern Russia and the Uman Campaign. As part of the 11th Army, the 132nd Infantry Division is then deployed into Crimea. The Crimean Campaign, a battle totally void of panzers and mechanized units, was won mainly by the 6 German and Romanian infantry divisions that suffered through 10 months of pure hell. The reader will find this portion of the memior the most riveting. Biederman's division was constantly on the march either engaged against Soviet counter offensives or involved in the horrific assault against the Fortress Sevastopol. Biederman's account of the figthing, the climate conditions, and his interaction with the Tartars is griping.
   
   The last portion of the memior is concerned with his time serving with Army Group North. As stated above, this is where Biederman's narrative suffers. Which is unfortuante, as what he and fellow soldiers went through must have been beyond words. The visciousness of the fighting and deprivation of Army Group North during the 1943-1945 timeframe would be difficult enough without his meandering and narrative problems. Still, Biederman does offer some enlightening commentary. He sheds light on the Army Group Commander, Generaloberst Schoerner, that I've never read before. Schoerner appears to have possessed all of the qualities that comes to mind when describing that breed of officers one all too often reads about -the political General. Schoerner took great pride in handing out punitive sentences to any enlisted man he found wanting. According to Biederman, many rear echelon NCOs found themselves assigned to front line duties for even the smallest offences. Biederman, as a lieutenent, had one such run in with Schoerner. It appears the general didn't like Biederman's siutation report, and as punishment Biderman was assigned digging trenches. There is also a gripping account of the death of the 132nd Division commander, General Lindeman. Lndeman was one of the officers involved in the July 1944 plot to kill Hitler.
   
   Biederman, like the other members of Army Group North surrendered in May 1945. The Epilouge details the 4 years he spent in various Gulags. I think many readers may be offended that Biederman wasn't more contrite for serving in the German Army during World War II. What I think many people have to realize is that Biederman and the millions of enlisted men who served that evil Regime were survivors. Thier torment had to have some meaning; Biederman was wounded 7 times, and had few combat honors or medals. He witnessed untold, unwritten heorism at the platoon and squad level. The fact that he survived the war and imprisonment bespoke of a toughness that few possess. I'm sure he witnessed the occaisonal "war crime". But what combat soldier didn't? There were accounts of US and British soldiers killing wounded Germans or Japanese, but you won't find them in memiors. Those kind of actions have always occured during the heat of battle. But for the most part, the German soldier was not responsible for the atrocities that occured on the Eastern Front. The Waffen SS and SD have that honor.

5 comments about American Patriot: The Life and Wars of Colonel Bud Day.

1. This is a great book that is bound to be of interest to many pilots.
   
   It is the story of Misty 1, the leader of the Top Secret Squadron that flew some of the most dangerous missions of the Vietnam War, alone, solo, on the deck, with no wingman or back up. But it's more than that. Much more.
   
   Most of our tales of American heros are old, from the Revolutionary War or perhaps World War II. This book starts there, but there is so much more.
   
   It's a story that Americans should know about a deadbeat kid from the wrong side of the tracks who bettered himself and served his nation with honor. I got misty eyed in places.
   
   And the end of the book -- when Colonel Day and his wife successfully fought Washington politics and self-serving revisionist history is the stuff of legends. When our own government sought to betray its veterans, Bud Day's small law firm sued in the Supreme Court and prevailed. The story of what really happened behind the scenes in the 2004 election was even more amazing. God bless Colonel Bud Day, and God Bless America.
   
   Americans should read this book. It should be required reading for high school history classes. This story exemplifies the service, deeds and honor that made America great, not in the long-ago past, but today; not just in the past but also for the future. It's timely reading for the 2008 election. Bud Day was John McCain's roommate in the Hanoi Hilton prison camp, where they both suffered torture and inhumane treatment.
   
   This is a story of honor and the American Dream, and Robert Coram tells it well, and in honor of the father he never understood.



2. Excellent! For those history buffs, it tells of his military and civilian accomplishments for all veterans.



3. A must read for anyone who wishes to understand what sets the "military" man apart from his civilian counterpart. This book also goes a long way in describing the angst that still resides with our Vietnam Vets and the betrayal they felt from the US Government, the media, and the citizens.



4. The things this man has done are amazing. Not everyone will like the part about doing everything he can to keep John Kerry out of the Oval Office but I sure as hell did. He is a true American Hero. Read and keep this book.



5. I wish I could meet Col. Bud Day and thank him personally for what he has done. The book reads a narrative of his life from childhood in Sioux City to this day in Florida. I am very impressed. Col. Day's life is an example every man and woman should and could follow. A man of righteous convictions, morally and spiritually strong and right and above all, he has been in the service of his country for more than 6 decades. He volunteered to fight in WW II as a Marine, then as an Army reservists in yrs after WW II and later as an Air Force officer pilot in Korea & Vietnam. He did every thing asked of him truly the right way. He was shot down in 1967 and held captive as a POW for more than 6 yrs. His life is filled with honor and sense of duty and courage. I wish I could be him. Colonel Bud Day sets an example for the people and readers can model themselves around his character. There's nothing wrong with this man who has won the US Congressional Medal of Honor. The book is terrific and an easy read yet it is hard to put down. I couldn't. I am going to read other works by the author Mr. Coram. I loved this book and I believe every young men and women should read this book to learn a few simple things. Regardless of your nationality and politics, this man, Bud Day, has things to offer and it is best that we learn. Highly recommended book!

2 comments about Nathan Hale: The Life and Death of America's First Spy.

1. Other than a few children's authors, no one has published a definitive biography of Nathan Hale for decades. M. William Phelps has now stepped in to fill the gap. Using his investigative research skills, honed as a true crime writer, Phelps has combed the archives to find any and all of the information currently available about the life of Nathan Hale. That is not an easy task, as most of the primary documents come from British sources, who, understandably, were biased. Most of the secondhand sources were provided years after Hale's death in 1776, and the tendency at that time was to glorify and romanticize.
   
   In this book, Phelps has pulled together all available, credible documentation, and presented the information in an interesting format that blends fact-based fiction (vignettes from Hale's life) and hard data. Hale's upbringing, early stint as a schoolteacher, and fateful career as Revolutionary War soldier, are critically examined and brought to life. Hale is portrayed as an earnest young man who, like many of his contemporaries, saw the war for independence as a chance to prove one's belief in and devotion to the ideals of liberty and equality. Perhaps the most intriguing section deals with the possible ways in which Hale was identified and apprehended as a spy, as the mythology swirling around that event has long been debated. Did Samuel Hale, Nathan's Tory cousin and an officer on the staff of British General Gage, betray his kinsman? Did the infamous Robert Rogers entrap him? What about the patron of the tavern Nathan was said to frequent?
   
   It will probably never be possible to determine exactly how and why Nathan Hale became the "martyr spy" of the American Revolution. Evidence clearly indicates that he wanted to do something heroic and memorable, and that indeed is what happened. Did he really say,"I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country" just moments before his death by hanging? I think he did. Read Phelps's Nathan Hale and draw your own conclusions.



2. What a shame that modern History textbooks leave out the story of Nathan Hale. Phelps has done a wonderful job of capturing the essence of a forgotten hero. Hale showed much promise as a young officer in Washington's rag-tag Continental army. I have always been intrigued by the mystery-ridden tale of how a 21-year old with everything going for him could take on such a risky mission, then accept the unfortunate consequences with such dignity, grace, and honor. I highly recommend this biography to anyone who enjoys reading about those who go above and beyond the call of duty for our great nation.

5 comments about Storm of Steel (Penguin Classics).

1. At first I thought this book was going to turn out to be one of those books that were written at a different time that just couldnt have a style to keep readers this day and age interested. I was wrong. Junger has a style all his own and you will feel has if you are the one standing in his boots through all the epic battles and hardships. You can almost see the mortor shells landing around him with all the carnage that goes with them. You will feel happy when he triumphs, and sad when men are there one minute and gone forever the next. This book will only get better the further you get into and the ending I will admit put a tear to my eye, this man deserved everything he earned and more. His final battle is one you will not be able to put down. I found my self reading paragraphs two and even three times over again convincing my self that my eyes were not playing tricks on me. This book is a must have for anyone who is even mildly interested in combat novels.



2. This is an amazing book to read. Junger was a stormtrooper--the German soldiers who lead the first wave into the trenches--for something like four years. It seems extraordinary that anyone could have survived such a holocaust, let alone four years of it. There is very little in the way of emotional expression in this book, or personal or political observation. Junger devoted his writing to the material details of the battle. This book takes you right into it with unforgettable detail--the acrid smoke, the seemingly ceaseless rain of artillery. More of Jungers men seem to be felled by German artillery than the opposition. Junger describes a scene in which a battery is destroyed and a single horse survives, fleeing across the desolate landscape, "a white ghostly figure." From the very first minutes on the line, artillery remained a constant danger for these men. The book describes harrowing scenes of shootouts with snipers and machine gunners, shooting men at pointblank range with pistols. One scene describes a group of British cornered in a trench. Junger's men throw grenades into the trench. After each blast, helmets, rags of body parts, and blood flies up in the air. His unit moves forward to the edge of the smoking trench to finish the British off, only to be mowed down by British rifle fire as they prepare to fire. This is combat at its most intense! An ungorgettable read that takes you into the eye of the storm of steel. Definitely, good reading. You won't be able to put it down.



3. a straight-forward soldier's book written by a man who went through the whole war in the front lines - and survived! pleasingly free of the political whining and hand-wringing the saturates so many of the accounts written by 'our side' about this bloody and pointless conflict. the narrative touches on all aspects of the military experience of a member of the p.b.i. (poor bloody infantry) and can serve for those on any side or army in this meat grinder of a war. i've been reading a couple of books a week on military history for about 50 years and rate this book in the top three personal accounts - a truly excellent work.



4. STORM OF STEEL offers WWI from a German soldier's point of view, but Erich Maria Remarque it ain't. All told, author Ernst Junger was shot multiple times, yet would live not only to write this book (and many others) but to celebrate his 103rd birthday (attended by an unusually patient Grim Reaper-in-Waiting).
   
   On the penultimate page of this book, he writes: "Leaving out trifles such as ricochets and grazes, I was hit at least fourteen times, these being five bullets, two shell splinters, one shrapnel ball, four hand-grenade splinters and two bullet splinters, which, with entry and exit wounds, left me an even twenty scars." Like George Washington (who also was shot at, over, under, and through), someone seemed to be watching over Junger.
   
   Fans of war literature will relish this book. Junger takes the reader through the trenches of Flanders, the Somme, Cambrai, Langemarck, and many other WWI locales. His narrative is straightforward and blunt, including many details on soldiers' deaths (German AND British) with a full compliment of gory details. He seldom editorializes or pontificates, and even acts as if gas attacks are normal (well, they were -- then). The narrative has that "rubbernecker" effect going for it. The appalling body counts almost carry you forward, despite your disbelief at the complete waste of humanity. Meanwhile, Junger riffs on tests of manhood and the rush (along with the fear) that is war.
   
   Junger writes: "In war you learn your lessons, and they stay learned, but the tuition fees are high." Understatement. With examples of both mercy and bloody resolve, Junger's behavior will continue to astonish readers as they read his detailed account. Unencumbered by any attempts at high art or literary flair, STORM OF STEEL will put you there, giving you a real taste of how fleeting life was for these young men. The War had no winner and only one loser -- humanity itself -- only Junger chooses not to state as much. Instead, he trusts in his readers. Recommended for fans of history, WWI, and war literature. If you've read other works in the WWI canon, this is a worthy addition.



5. For most people who only know World War I from their high school days when they did a book review on "All Quiet On The Western Front" this book is required reading. Against the spate of anti-war books by those who saw limited service and little combat, Ernst Juenger's book is truly authentic. He fought for his nation to win, and it was not until the Ludendorf offensive that he participated in during the Spring of 1918 was stopped (in his opinion, due to German artillery blocking the infantry's advance), that the author came to feel that Germany might lose the war. After all, at that time Romania, Serbia and Russia had been defeated, Italy was in disarray, the French relatively inactive, and the Americans had not yet arrived in strength. And it must be remembered that Germany always possessed inferior numbers compared to the allies on the Western front.
   
   The author has been condemned and marginalized in the US for his unabashed nationalism by the American leftist academic and political elite to the point that he is almost unknown in the English-speaking world. Juenger did his duty willingly and with enthusiam for four long years in combat on the Western front during World War I, and his refusal to condemn war has made him anathema to the Western literary world. Even though Juenger was not a Nazi and resisted Hitler's siren songs, his love for his country was enough to have his work censored through silence.
   
   The reader should carefully read the review by the Washington Post writer given above. Tellingly he states his personal viewpoint, "Like many people, I have absolutely no love for the martial spirit, detest all forms of nationalism, and feel queasy at the sight of blood." Hopefully the ER personnel attending to him following an accident will be able to function while seeing blood, but I guess "God Bless America" is out, and the Post reviewer will avoid service in the American Army with whatever excuse. This is the contemporary attitude of the liberal elite and media, formed over the last sixty years of leftist propaganda in our schools, universities, and on television. Juenger would be appalled.
   
   This translation by Hofmann is better than the ones I have read previously, but German speakers are advised to read his works in their original German. Hofmann effectively translates the German idioms that have stumped other translators and the Introduction should be read carefully to understand why a faithful translation is important. This volume is based on Juenger's revised edition (Juenger revised his book at least eight times), most probably the latest one from 1961.
   
   This book was written from Juenger's diary originally in 1920, is not fiction, and is the only extensive work from World War I from a long-serving combat soldier in the war. That alone makes it important, but that it is well-written and describes four major battles from the viewpoint of the soldier in the trenches makes it uniquely invaluable. That it remains almost unknown in the US is a tragedy and due exclusively to the powers that abhor the military and nationalism at any level -- even that for the United States.
   
   The details I leave to the many other reviewers who have more than adequately covered the tragedy and frightfulness of war. Juenger retains a sense of humor throughout, and even suggests that war is the most pronounced experience that a man can undergo. For the doubters, please read Glenn Gray's "The Warriors." In many respects, World War I was probably the most terrifying war in history for the individual infantryman. He lived a terrible existence in mud and squalor, subject to death at any moment from the ever-present artillery fire, and his survival depended more on chance than on his own skills. To some degree that changed in World War II and in subsequent wars where individual skills played an increasingly larger part in determining a soldier's survival.
   
   In short, BUY & READ this book. Don't accept passively what you are told to believe by the media, your teachers and professors. Juenger is well worth the read and you may actually learn something about lives of soldiers in World War I. Juenger is certainly an Alpha-male type, but his true story is as important as those written by anti-war fiction writers and those with political agendas.

5 comments about War As I Knew It.

1. Unfortunately, Patton doesn't describe the battle planning to the degree I had hoped. Too much high level discussions of this Battalion and that Regiment. But some good insight into his relationship with Monty and Ike.



2. George S. Patton, Jr. died December 21, 1945 in Heidelberg Germany of injuries sustained in an automobile accident on December 9th of that year, a day before his scheduled return to America. His writings included a "full diary from June, 1942, until Dec. 5, 1945" and the manuscript of the book "War As I Knew It". The book was first published in 1947. "The text [of the published book] ... is ... precisely as it came from the General's swift pen with the single elimination of a criticism of one officer who, if he erred, most splendidly atoned." (xiv: Introduction by Douglas Southall Freeman)
   
   The text lacks any detail of actual battles, other than broad movements at the level of Corps and Division. It is very much a rough overview, as the title suggests, of Patton's experience as a General in WWII. Its value derives from Patton having written it, more than for what is written within it. It is not the great book (we may imagine) he would have written later had he lived.



3. Patton' memoir of his role in WWII. Written shortly before his death in Dec 1945 and published by his wife. Patton example of leadership is applicable to all leaders and all leaders would benefit by reading this book. Appended to this book are copies of Patton's general orders for the conduct of the 3rd Army in Europe which includes some very good practical advice for the fighting soldier and commander.



4. Whereas we've all heard the weak-kneed, faint-hearted, army deserter types condemn Patton as bloodthirsty, this book reveals Patton the intellectual, the man who believes deeply in his mission and destiny, and one who is prepared to sacrifice life and limb in order to to honor his role in the history of the world.
   I found this book to be highly insightful, educational, entertaining, and motivating. I learned about strategy and received an interesting and unique glimpse into the mind of a truly great man. Patton was the cream of the crop - well educated, strong, courageous, and determined, and he had the intelligence and wisdom to back his decisions up. Would that we had a fearless leader like this today.



5. flamboyant and irrealistic data of german losses ( see german sources ...KTB/OKW. etc. )