5 comments about A-Train: Memoirs of a Tuskegee Airman.

1. I initially bought this book expecting it to be similar to the other slew of WWII books out there ( The ME-109 dove at me out of the sun with guns blazing...). Instead I got an honest account of a man who wanted to fly for his country and be treated with the same respect as any other pilot. Dryden's memories and descriptions of his voyage through training to be a pilot as well as the segregated and de-segregated Air Force are interesting and honest. Dryden't narrative is not the heart-pounding, can't-put-the-book down type but rather the story of a man who, faced with tremendous adversity from his own society and country, persevered. There is no bitterness in Dryden's story, and I put the book down tremendously impressed by his belief in himself, in his religion and his friend. It's a good book



2. Every young African American boy should read this book. It is an inspiration.



3. I meet Col. Dryden when he gave a talk about his experiences and his book. I then read the book a felt a tremendous respect for the author and all the Tuskeegee Airmen. Col. Dryden tells his personal story in a way that made me feel as though I was there with him the whole time. The challanges of blacks in America in his story left a powerful impact on me, the courage the author displayed is an insperation. A-Train is very well written and reads easily. It is an powerful story that left me feeling inadequate and ashamed to be white. I had the oportunity to meet Col. Dryden again and sought him out just to shake his hand again, knowing him from his book, it was hard to hide my emotions.



4. Charles Dryden's book forces people to see the trials and tribulations encountered by black servicemen and women during WWII. I was shocked to read about the different encounters with 'Jim Crow' that Dryden and his peers waded through during their service years. A must for anybody curious about WWII, the Tuskegee Airmen or about the fight for civil rights in America.



5. I had the opportunity to read this book. From the moment of the first word to the very last word, the book draws you in to read more. The graphic descriptions can take you to the other side of the world and stand next to the author on his travels. You know what it was like be black during the "Jim Crow" days on the trains in the south. Granted that my 25 years never saw the ugly side of America, his visual imagery is just so vivid that I seriously think they should dump "Scarlett Letter" and place this book on the reading lists of High School Students.

5 comments about Washington's General: Nathanael Greene and the Triumph of the American Revolution.

1. Terry Golway is a superb author and his work on Nathaniel Greene is one of his best works. If you are interested in the American Revolution and have some general background, you'll love this book. Golway takes you on a virtual tour of the life of this great American. He offers the reader a chance to not only follow General Greene through the day to day events of the war, but gives you a ample opportunities to consider the thinking behind his actions.
   
   Golway is careful not to elevate Nathaniel Greene to hero status as some authors have done. General Greene certainly had his share of faults and failures. But, his ability to persevere and ultimately succeed are the characteristics that make this such a great story. I recommend it to anyone who has read enough to know who Nathaniel Greene is. If you haven't read much on the Revolution, I suggest "A History of the American Revoultion" by Alden. This is not the most recent book on the subject, but it remains one of the best.



2. Nathanael Greene was often said to be George Washington's choice to take command of the continental army, should he himself be captured or killed. This is particularly striking when one considers that Greene was a private in the Rhode Island militia one year, and a general in the continental army the next. In Golway's excellent biography, we learn a great deal about Greene, possibly all we can know. This contrast can be frustrating, but it is not Golway's fault. How did a man who was a private, and asked to leave the guard due to his limp, come to be named a general? Golway can't tell us, as the historical record apparently just doesn't exist. Such frustrations aside, we get a great picture of Greene from what does exist. He was obviously a man of great understanding, realizing how the war would truly be won or lost (not necessarily on the battlefied, but "in the hearts and minds" of the populace). He was a businessman who became the quartermaster general against his own dreams of glory, and in so doing may well have saved the army. He was mindful of his own profits, while sacrificing much to the cause. He was the husband of a legendarily vivacious and impressive woman that we sadly do not know enough about. He lusted after glory, and was hypersenstive to criticism. His leadership in the Southern campaign set up the victory at Yorktown. Beyond all the facts we could list, Nathanael Greene epitomized what America would be at its best: a place where someone could reinvent themselves and be judged by ability and accomplishement rather than accidents of birth.



3. This is a much needed book that rightfully gives some credit to one of George Washington's most important and able lieutenants. Nathanael Green did not receive much formal education, yet he sought knowledge and surrounded himself with others who were better educated; he was not a professional soldier by trade, yet learned the lessons of battle; he lost all the major battles he fought in, yet his strategy achieved victory in the South in the final analysis. This is the story of an often overlooked figure in the period of the American Revolution.
   
   Golway is to be credited for bringing due attention to Greene, but the author doesn't fall into hero worship; he is often critical of Greene. He made bad calls in his quarrels with others and in some of his decisions on the battlefield. Greene was obsessed with his reputation, wanted the approval of others, fell into bouts of self-pity, took criticism fairly hard, and so forth. His relationship with his wife seemed one of devotion and affection, but that didn't prevent him from writing to his wife about the other women he encountered and how tempted he was. This is a very human Nathanael Greene that emerges in this book, which makes him easier to relate too as well. After all, don't we all share certain traits in common, both the positive and the less flattering?
   
   The man with the limp was ridiculed by others when he first joined the military, but he grew into his role and held the confidence of his commander, George Washington. Greene made some bad calls on the field, but he learned from them. He also served as Quartermaster General, a critically important role, but one that denied him (as Greene thought) his often sought after military glory on the battlefield. He gained his chance for glory in his assignment to the Southern theater of operations in the Carolinas against Lord Charles Cornwallis, who had badly defeated two American armies.
   
   Without going into each battle or engagement that took place in South and North Carolina and Georgia, suffice it to say that Greene did what he had to do, namely, to keep the Continental army alive and wear down the British army. In these objectives he succeeded. He lost all the major battles he fought in, but they were battles that incurred heavy costs on the British and forced them to give up on their hopes of subduing the South. Even members of the British high command were quoted acknowledging Greene's skills in this campaign. Of course Greene wasn't the only man responsible for this result, but he provided the leadership, the ability, and the perseverance that were needed.
   
   The final pages seemed rushed in my opinion and there were some points that could have been developed further, but overall this was a good book. Greene served his country well and it was unfortunate that he died so soon after the war ended.



4. easily one of the most underrated generals in american history...terry golway gives greene the recognition and appreciation greene was looking for...if you love reading about the revolution, this is the book for you...easy and vivid read that traces greenes accomplishments and even his weaknesses throughout life...you will not be disappointed.



5. He has been called, "the most underappreciated great man in the War for Independence." George Washington's hand-picked successor, Nathanael Greene was born into a prominent Rhode Island Quaker family. Plagued by insecurities due to his lack of education and military experience, he nonetheless provided an invaluable contribution to the cause of Liberty.
   
   Shortly after enlisting in his state's militia, some of his unit suggested that he resign. They felt that his marked "limp" detracted from their "manly, martial appearance." Against their wishes he remained and within six months was commissioned as a general. By the end of the Revolution, he would be second only to Washington himself.
   
   Greene's meteoric rise to glory is highlighted by his passionate patriotism and intense sense of loyalty. As Washington's reluctant yet efficient Quartermaster, he sustained the Continental Army through some of the leanest years of the war, battling Congress for much-needed funds. As commander of the Southern front, he would outfox Cornwallis in the swamps of the Low-Country and hills of the Carolinas.
   
   This book turns a long-overdue spotlight on one of our forgotten heroes. Based on scholarly research from both primary and secondary sources, it retains a readability that historical laymen such as myself find appealing. For anyone interested in our nation's history or in a genuine American hero, I recommend Washington's General.

5 comments about Jarhead: A Marine's Chronicle of the Gulf War and Other Battles.

1. What a dreary, unnecessarily ugly, gloomy, depressing diatribe. Swofford's Jarhead reminded me at times of Vera Britain's Testament of Youth. Everyone coming into contact with Ms. Britain suffered for the rest of their damned lives, and the same holds true of Tony Swofford.
   It's hard not to feel sorry for the star-crossed, snake-bit Swofford but it saps the life right out of you. HIs father is an over-bearing, alcoholic, disciplinarian deeply scarred by the Vietnam War; his mother indifferent; sister - mentally ill, suicidal and institutionalized; his brother, a delusional, congenital liar who dies of cancer; his girlfriend - unfaithful; best friend - killed in an automobile accident and on and on.
   With such a litany of woe readers might anticipate MR. Swofford endured harrowing combat in Iraq and has written the book to work through those experiences - but Gloomy-Tony never fires a shot. After viewing Iraqi corpses he's shaken to the very marrow of his bones - apparently unaware the Marine Corps is about combat, and combatants often die violent deaths. Not the book to read if down - or up for that matter. Gloomy Tony has just enough education to make him dangerous and his book goes nowhere.
   Depsite placing his rifle to the temple of a fellow Marine, Swofford is genuinely dismayed when no-one asks if he OK after narrowly avoiding a live grenade. I agree the Middle Eastern wars are a travesty, but so is Jarhead.



2. personally, i like the fact he admits to not enjoying the corp, he told the truth, instead of writing a book about how much he was toughest guy in the world and he loved everyday of the corp, he admitted to fear and hate.he curses non stop in the book, but it is written by a marine. he's a real man, he told the truth. he dident wright this book for praise, he wrote it cause he loves to wright.



3. Boring, laced with profanity, raunchiness, whiny, so I find it difficult to relate to this author. He seems like a cry baby to me, and not very intelligent. The book is written to make it seem more than it is, which isn't very much at all. And the constant attempt to make everything poetic is very annoying and an obvious filler technique. This book just sucks! The worst personal perspective war book I think exist. I have no idea how this became a movie, but then there are plenty of stupid movies made all the time.



4. Text Review: Jarhead
   Reviewer: Jessica
   
   This historical fiction novel, Jarhead by Anthony Swofford, is in part historically accurate but also embellished in the detail for story sake. The recollection of the events of the war in the story, when the main character Anthony told them, mentioned Saddam Hussein's overrun of Kuwait and their oil, mentioned the massive international deployment to the Arabian Peninsula and the air raid against Iraq. Anthony chronologically reiterated these historical events, but at the same time detailed aspects of his life. Jarhead is more of the story about Anthony in the war as a soldier than about the war itself.
   
   This novel is written from the perspective of a marine. From start to finish the reader follows Anthony on his journey through boot camp to the frontline and back home. As a reader we connect with his emotions and understand the emotional and physical pressure subdued to these men that sign over their lives to fight for US safety. By having this perspective the historical event of the Gulf War is brought down to a level that is more understandable to the mass public. The public can connect with the chain of events through Anthony's character. The only down fall is that there is a biased on how to view the war. To Anthony he was very apprehensive about going to war a felt he was obligated to enlist; through a historians perspective we are only given the facts and not personal feelings.
   
   A historical fiction novel gives a reader a very basic understanding of history. Unlike that of a text book, in novels the focus is on the characters and their reactions and their emotion struggles. Usually these types of novels are about specific moments in history and cover very brief time frames and specific events. Jarhead is one of those novels; we obtain the basic idea of the gulf war and its reasoning behind it, but mainly are focused on Anthony's life and his adventure through the desert. The reader will connect with the situation and understand more what a marine feels and thinks as they walk through the harsh desert, withstand the brutally cold nights and push through the open fire dodging bullets. If the reader does not know about the war prior to reading this novel the most they will be educated on is what and when the war happened. Historically the events are accurate but not a main focus.
   
   This book is highly acclaimed and gratefully appreciated. The connection with Anthony develops throughout the story and the reader grows to love and care for this marine. I would recommend this book to those who have been through what Anthony has and to those who want to further understand the life of a marine. On a scale of 1-5, I would rate this book a 3 for the detail and the emotional bond built while reading.



5. Jarhead by Anthony Swofford, is the memoir of a former U.S. Marine sniper during the first Gulf War in 1991. It's a very intelligent and humorous look at military life for a new generation. Swofford was stationed in Saudi Arabia, at the northern most area right behind Kuwait for more than six months before the short-lived combat started. This was called "Operation Desert Shield", as to shield the massive oil wells of Saudi Arabia from the Iraqi Republic Guard. As you know, the actual combat, "Operation Desert Storm" started in January and was over in late February.

5 comments about House to House.

1. Wow what can you really say. This was a great story that made you feel like you were right there with him. Couldn't put it down until I finished it.



2. My boyfriend is in the military. And until I had read this book it was hard to imagine exactly what he is going through. This book let me feel like I was side by side those soldiers and after reading it, I can only feel incrediably grateful and blessed that we have such amazing soldiers fighting for our freedom. Everyone should read this book, whether you are for Operation Iraqi Freedom or not, and afterwards appreciate everything that they go through for us.



3. The way that David Bellavia describes what was going on around him and what he was doing to survive is amazing! When you read it, it's almost as if you can picture everything as he had seen it while he was there. The pictures that are included in the book make it that much better. To see the soldiers, the men that were fighting along side of him the entire time is just captivating. A must-read for anyone that enjoys books about the history of wars and those that love the soldiers that give us our freedom!



4. 'House to House' should be mandatory reading for every single person in the United States. SSG David Bellavia has written a no-nonsense, kick-you in-the-gut memoir to recount his experiences in Iraq; a memoir that once you pick up, you won't be able to put down. I started reading it this morning, and just finished the last page about five minutes ago. Bellavia doesn't pull any punches, and recounts vividly and in detail, everything he and his men saw, said, and did in the battles for Muqdadiyah and Fallujah. He is a true American hero, and his love for his men, his country, and his family shine through in every page. I enthusiastically give this book five stars, and would give it even more if I could. God bless SSG Bellavia, and the rest of our troops that have fought and died for this great country!



5. A magnificent book. Bellavia offers a clear-eyed, gritty look at battle. I couldn't put it down. More than just a war story, Bellavia offers moving insights into the warrior's soul. Recommended for anyone interested in first person comabt accounts.

1 comments about American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880 - 1964.

1. This book is a classic. Even the title page is brilliant. MacArthur is The American Caesar, imperious and outstanding, always posturing and yet commanding a fanatical following. A complex man, his brilliance is constantly dogged by his insecurities, his successes balanced by his failures and so on. truly the modern Prometheus!
   He completely misread the Japanese intentions to bomb the Philippines and the Chinese determination to hang on to North Korea. His bizarre and brazen behaviour towards the last days of his command points to a man losing his grip with reality. Perhaps, the strain of playing centrestage for so long had taken its toll.
   Definitely not pro-MacArthur, Manchester does paint a sympathetic portrait of this great man.

5 comments about Panzer Leader.

1. Guderian was a military theorist and innovative General of the German Army during the Second World War. Germany's panzer forces were raised and fought according to his works, best-known among them Achtung - Panzer!
   
   As some have already pointed out, this is not a cowboy action book like a "D-Day" or "Bridge too far". Instead, it is a detailed account covering the formation of german tank forces, key battles and an exhaustive analysis of the russian campaign. This book is not for casual WW2 readers - you need to be passionate about WW2 to appreciate this book. The lack of coherent maps (while describing campaigns, strategies, offense etc) is the only reason why I am giving 3 stars instead of 4.



2. Heinz Guderian's "Panzer Leader" provides an inside story of the development of the German armored forces before World War II and the operation of those forces during that war. Guderian was one of the major figures helping to develop the Panzer doctrine of quick striking and deep thrusting armored attacks. And the book portrays the resistance from more traditional army leaders in the German military.
   
   The Introduction (by Kenneth Macksey) observes that (page vii): "'Panzer Leader' is about one man's endeavor, at a moment of institutional change, to defend his country by the modernization of its army." An obvious question is what do talented military leaders do when serving political leaders who are not worthy of their loyalty? In the "Foreword," B. H. Liddell Hart casually notes that (page 13): "'Their's not to reason why, theirs but to do and die. No nation that maintains fighting services can afford to revoke that rule of experience. Where soldiers begin to question the rightness of the cause for which they are fighting, armies soon collapse." And perhaps Hart unwittingly makes a point. When should a military recoil from the madness of a leader like Hitler? Hart may be far too forgiving of soldiers fighting for wicked causes. Still, a difficult issue.
   
   The book itself traces, briefly, Guderian's early life. It then considers his role in the development of German armor and the consequent doctrines of warfare based on the use of armor. He discusses the German movements against Austria and the Sudetenland and then the invasion of Poland.
   
   The role of armor was most dramatically seen with the German attack on the Western front. The Panzer divisions sliced deep into the allied defenses, creating havoc. Only Hitler's foolish calling off the army at Dunkirk allowed the English to rescue substantial elements of its ground forces.
   
   Guderian's tale of the preparation for and carrying out of the attack on Russia is detailed (and dry). Much detail is provided (and see Manstein's book on the same subject, "Lost Victories"). Perhaps most telling is his tale of the slashing retreat as German forces found themselves vastly outnumbered by Russian forces and subject to the awful weather of Russia. Guderian explains the mad strategy of Hitler of refusing to let the German forces find better sites to defend their positions. For his criticisms of Hitler (pretty courageous of Guderian), he was relieved--only to come back later as, of all things, Chief of the German General Staff.
   
   At the end, he ventures a few observations on leading personalities of the Third Reich and concludes with some very brief comments. It would have been interesting to get deeper reflections from his perspective on the nature of the war, the role of the army vis-à-vis a despotic government, his own sense of the role that he played. The final part of the book is a series of Appendices that are useful (memos of critical events, for example).
   
   This is a book, like Manstein's, that is useful for providing graphic detail of the military struggles of the Second World War. And both reveal little perspective by the two fighting generals of their role in the misery created by the Third Reich.



3. My son got me this for Christmas a couple of years ago...it may well be the finest memoir by a General Officer I have ever read [I have to admit that most of those by Confederate Generals are bure bilge]. Heinz Guderian was a commander of early, primitive, tanks in WWI, essentially invented modern tank warfare between the wars, then commanded Panzers in WWII, leading the invasions of Poland, France, and Russia.
   
   General Guderian makes no moral judgments on the right or wrong of his job; he was told to go after lebensraum, and he did it. A devout Christian man, he must have been bothered at times, but....remember, Pope Benedict XVI fought for the same cause, though far below General Guderian's pay grade. He makes plenty of judgment on the stupidity of the Russian campaign, and on the defective plan in France, but that's all.
   
   This was no modern day JEB Stuart [tanks are the military descendent of horse cavalry]; Guderian left the flash and style to the likes of Patton and Rommel, on whom it looked better. Maybe Guderian was Wade Hampton or Joe Wheeler. [The are no comparisons for Forrest; he was unique, though so few are].
   
   This fine book is, of course, a translation. I can't vouch for the accuracy, as I can't read German, but it is quite readable. In most wars, the books are about, and by, the winners; the two exceptions are Germans from WWII, and Confederates. It has been said that that's because those are the two losing sides that still have adherents....maybe, but if you want to find out how a horse turned into a tank, and how a modern army is built, start right here.



4. I focus on matters not elaborated by the many other reviewers, and this review is based on the original (1952) edition.
   
   Guderian claims that the Pomorska Cavalry Brigade charged German tanks with lances, "in ignorance of the nature of our tanks" (p. 72). This contrasts with western accounts, which blame Polish impetuousness and foolhardiness for this supposed act. In actuality, the Polish cavalry had discontinued the use of lances well before WWII (see the Peczkis review of Poland 1939: The Birth Of Blitzkrieg (Campaign)).
   
   Otherwise, General Guderian shows more respect for the much-maligned 1939 Polish Army than did the British and Americans. "The first serious fighting took place...the leading tanks found themselves face to face with Polish defensive positions. The Polish anti-tank gunners scored many direct hits." (p. 70). He writes of the "fierce battles for Warsaw" (p. 84), and characterizes the Poles as "a tough and courageous enemy." (p. 73).
   
   Guderian recognizes the fact that the Communist alliance with the Nazis had not been simply an innocent, tactical move: "On September 29th, 1939, Russia signed a pact of friendship with Germany and at the same time made a trade agreement that was of considerable value to the Germans in the economic prosecution of the war." (p. 140).
   
   The much-romanticized Hitler bomb plot never had a chance (pp. 344-345). There was no means of destroying the many pro-Hitler leaders. And, when Stauffenberg flew into Berlin with his mistaken announcement that Hitler was dead, he found no significant following.
   
   In describing the Warsaw Uprising, Guderian mentions the losses which the Germans had just inflicted on the Red Army (p. 359), and this is distorted by Soviet apologists into proof that the Red Army was thereby immobilized. To begin with, Guderian was referring to the period around August 1--certainly not the entire 5.5 months that the Red Army sat idly on the eastern bank of the Vistula. Moreover, Guderian's information is instructive. Throughout the first half of 1944, the Red Army had been routing the Germans with its "considerable superiority in strength" (p. 327), causing the total destruction of 25 German divisions (p. 336). Then, on the outskirts of Warsaw, the Soviet apologists would have us believe, the Soviet Army magically lost its strength for 5.5 months (August 1--January 12), only to magically regain it (and more) in the form of a 20:1 advantage in guns and 7:1 advantage in tanks (p. 382).
   
   Guderian claims credit for talking Hitler into recognizing the Warsaw combatants as regular soldiers (p. 356)--otherwise they wouldn't surrender knowing that the Germans would kill them all anyway. He mentions the frightful atrocities of the Dirlewanger and Kaminski units. Against the impression that Bach Zelewski had stopped them as a matter of principle, we find that nothing so noble was at work: "Von dem Bach took the precaution of having Kaminski shot and thus disposed of as a potentially dangerous witness." (p. 356)



5. Too many German Units by numbers, Maps(sketches) hard to read. Mayby great for a true student, but for me a little hard to follow.

5 comments about Children of the Flames: Dr. Josef Mengele and the Untold Story of the Twins of Auschwitz.

1. This harrowing book traces both the life of 'the angel of death', the psycopathic monster, Dr Josef Mengele, and his victims who survived.
   Mengele carried out a range of horrific experiments on a range of people, mainly twins. particularly Jewish and Gipsey children, and various others.
   As Mengele's life is described, so is the life of the survivors, the horrors that they experienced at Auschwitz and how they lived in the decades afterwards.
   "Most of the twins began their descent into Auschwitz by witnessing their entire families being led away from them to be killed. In their special barracks, located just yards away from the crematoriums, they observed the Nazis' extermination of Jews at close range. Twins as young as five and six years of age endured torture, daily blood tests and starvation diets, as well as facing exposure to epidemics of cholera, tuberculosis and other deadly diseases that were rampant because of unsanitary conditions. Worst of all, of course, were the Mengele's barbaric pseudoscientific experiments. But as horrific as their lives were the twins enjoyed a special privileged status, for they were regarded as "Mengele's children". And as such they were spared the random selections and march to the gas chambers that threatened every other Auschwitz inmate'.
   
   The testimony of a handful of survivors illustrates the horror of Mengele and Auschwitz, and the scars of the experiences suffered by his victims, and how they experienced them through their lives.
   In the testimony of Moshe Offer, who was twelve years old at the time: 'When they opened the doors to our cattle cars, there were lots of dead children. During the trip, some mothers couldn't bare to hear the sound of their hungry babies-and so they killed them. I remember two blond, very beautiful children in my car, whose mother had choked them to death because she could not stand to watch them suffer'.
   
   Eva Mozes, who was nine years old at the time, recounts how, at Auschwitz-Birkenau, she and her twin sister were packed into filthy, rat infested barracks, together with hundreds of other little girls.
   She remembers seeing three dead children on the ground. Later they would always be finding dead children on the floor of the latrines.
   From their barracks they could see huge, smoking chimneys rising high above the camp. There were glowing flames rising above them. ' " Why are they burning so late in the evening?" I asked the other children. "The Germans are burning people they answered".
   Twins Hedvah and Leah Stern. who were thirteen years old at the time, recount how Mengele tried to change the colour of their eyes:' One day we were given eye drops. Afterwards, we could not see for several days. We though the Nazis had made us blind.
   We were very frightened of the experiments. They took a lot of blood from us. We fainted several times, and the SS guards were very amused.
   We were not very developed. The Nazis made us remove our clothes and they took photographs of us.
   The SS guards would point to us and laugh. We stood naked in front of these young Nazi thugs, shaking from cold and fear, and they laughed."
   The first few chapters of the book deal with Mengele's role in Auschwitz itself, and the rest of the book relates Eichmann's experience in hiding in South America, and the way the surviving twins built up lives and families for themselves, most of them in Israel, while the nightmare of Auschwitz would scar and effect them forever.Most of the twins longed to emigrate to the Land of Israel, then the British Colony of Palestine.
   They soon found that the Communist rulers of their former homes in lands like Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania, were hostile to the Jewish people too, and pesecuted those who wanted to go to Israel and those who wanted to hold onto their Jewish faith, as 'Zionists'. Thus developed that form of Leftist anti-Semitism known as anti-Zionism, which was incubated by the Soviet Union, and is endemic among the international left today.
   The rest of the book deals with how Mengele dwindled in exile into a neurotic and bitter non-being. The surivors describe their lives in Israel and elsewhere, after the war, their often fearful behaviour, their nightmares and their treatment, and also how they built up new lives and families, which live on in the Jewish homeland.
   Mengele died after suffering a stroke and drowning in 1979, in Brazil.



2. This is a very good book with factual accounts from some of the youngest twins. What I found confusing is the way the author wrote the book. There seems to be some jumping around, comparisons of sorts. This book thoroughly explains how the surviving twins got together and met with the author, as well as the founding of their organization. This book does not go into great detail as to what specific types of horrific experiments were done, as most of the survivors able to tell their stories were very young at the time, and/or they have repressed their memories of the horror. It does give second-hand accounts of the 'goings-on' of Mengele by those that survived.



3. This book exceeded my expectations. The way the author goes back and forth between survivors' accounts and factual information about Mengele was a great way to keep the book interesting. I was intrigued from beginning to end. A lot of books that just rehash the past can be boring but this book was truely great. I learned a lot of factual information but also was deeply drawn to the survivors' stories. Highly recommended!



4. This book takes us from the youths of of Josef Mengele and his victims (briefly) to Auschwitz to the Nazi-hunting of the post-war period to the late 1980s. It tells these stories in alternating voices, stressing how necessary it is to do so: these stories are inextricably linked.
   
   The title is a bit misleading; this is perhaps weighed more on the side of a brief biography of Mengele, with emphasis on postwar activities. The stories of a group of twins break into the narrative in italicized bursts, fracturing it-- and thus reminding us all of how the horrific events of World War II fractured individuals, families, communities, nations.
   
   The book is an oral history of Auschwitz, told by those who survived it. Certainly, it is well researched (especially when it comes to the information about Nazi hunting and war tribunals), but the information in the "spotlight," so to speak, are the unsilenced voices of the twins. Do not expect pages of historical detail about what types of experiments were performed, reviews of medical cases, lengthy discussions of what occured in labs; that information is not there. This is a book about a handful of people and their stories, and while the book tells Mengele's for him, the twins tell their own. Particularly on the part of the twins, it is more a psychological study than a historical one (we could go into how psychology and history are intertwined, but it would be best for the reader to reach his or her own conclusions after reading the book).
   
   The text is deeply moving, often shattering. The voices that shatter the narrative of Mengele's life, denying the murderer any seamless biography, are vivid and alive. The authors picked a unique and, ultimately, extremely effective way to deliver biographies of oppresser and oppressed.



5. Where's the real info, the real description of Mengele's experiments, even a picture of the man??!! Not in this book.
   
   Let's get some things straight here: German Nazi scientists were extremely well trained, meticulous, and the creme of the creme for most of the 20th century. Mengele was no different. He was not sloppy, or random, or "insane" (in the conventional sense), or simply tortured kids for his entertainment. He was (from the 1940s to the 1960s at least) the World's premier expert on creating mind controlled people based on extreme trauma. Various types of trauma were inflicted on people to such an extent that their minds "fractured" (he also developed the best drugs to give them to prevent them from passing out, such that their conscious minds had to "deal" with the enormous pain, etc.). He controlled the "fracturing" process and created many different "alters" for different purposes within these people, essentially multiple personalities all within the same person, but completely unaware of the other. In other words, he perfected the manufacture of what has now been coined, The Manchurian Candidate, through trauma based mind control techniques. He did not originate the premise (as it was used in Egyptian times and perhaps earlier), but he greatly advanced the "science" of it.
   
   With this in mind, he used very young twins for a number of practical reasons: 1) twins represent the perfect control for experiments, 2) he found it was easier to fracture and "cement" the process in children under the age of 5. In fact, he knew that if a pregnant mother was traumatised and delivered a premature infant, it was even better. He also experimented on physically traumatising the fetus directly, 3) due to the Nazis great essoteric and occult interest, he was fascinated by the "etheric connection" twins have and was interested in quantifying it for military communication, 4) he realised that memories and emotions are carried within the blood, so he was also involved in blood transfusions and primitive organ transplants to test his hypotheses, and 5) it was even rumoured he was also interested in and advancing human cloning. In short, the discoveries that Mengele made and the results he was getting interested every government and military entitiy in the World, and they all bidded for his services at the end of WW2, irregardless of any morality or ethical questions. This is why the real documentation of what he was doing was not publicly admitted to. Instead, we were told he was just insane and wanted to dye all the chidren's eyes blue and convert them to Aryans.
   
   As it turned out, the Americans won the bidding, and Mengele was transferred along with THOUSANDS of other Nazi scientists in what was termed, "Operation Paperclip". Some of these Nazis joined the OSS (which later became the CIA), some formed what became known as NASA, others formed what became known as the NSA, but Mengele and his ilk continued with their mind control stuff within military facilites in Arizona, Nevada, California, Colorado, and possibly even Canada for MANY YEARS. In fact, he trained many other "programmers" in his techniques. Marilyn Monroe was what was termed a "Presidential Model" of mind control slave and many others have followed within Hollywood and the music business. In fact, Britney Spears is the best modern example of a mind control slave who is losing her programming.
   
   Mengele may have made appearances in South America from time to time, or maybe it was a body double, but he carried right where he left off in the dark days of WW2. And his program carries on TODAY. So, this book talks about some poor twins and its a sad and horrific story, but completely misses the point as to what Mengele was, where he went, and what became of him. He, along with the other Paperclip scientists, infiltrated the US and formed a 4th Reich of sorts...

5 comments about Attacks.

1. I have no complaints. In response to another review, German troops, specifically those under Rommel's command, are made to look far more competent than most troops of other nationalities Rommel encountered because by all accounts they were. Rommel's men wouldn't have surrendered in the thousands to 3 officers, nor been so lax in sentry and recon duty. When he encounters worthy foes he gives credit where it is due, in one case calling them "men in every way" to paraphrase. But the aggressive fighting spirit and competence of Rommel's men is shown time and time again. Volunteering to run out on a bridge under enemy fire and chop wires leading to bombs with a hand axe (for all that Sergeant knew the wires could have been electric and the bombs could have gone the second he got near one), swim a freezing cold, rapidly moving river alone to infiltrate enemy lines etc, this is what his men would do for him.
   
   The tone is largely a matter of interpretation, I believe that at the time and place the book was written it was not so much braggadocio as it was lack of false modesty, and rightful pride in his and his men's accomplishments. In America many will interpret this as shameless bragging.
   
   I see nothing wrong with the lessons of building fortifications to prevent casualties and conducting constant reconnaissance. However those are not by any means the only lessons in the book. Rommel's use of "supple infantry tactics" against often numerically far superior, and firepower-superior (though as mentioned before inferior in competence, aggression, and bravery) enemies, and his use of diversions, sneak attacks and generally concealed movements are timeless applied lessons of warfare straight out of Sun Tzu's "Art of War".
   
   His use of overwhelming concentrations of pinning fire, combined with the above, helped him limit casualties while flanking the enemy and capturing prisoners in the many thousands in total. He scarcely lost a battle even though he often didn't have the support of artillery during an attack due to materiale shortages. He was a very aggressive commander who always took the initiative when given the chance, something that paid off time and time again. He wasn't incautious, he simply knew an opportunity when he saw one, and was bold enough to exploit these situations.



2. The principal players of the Second World War paid their dues in the First, and Erwin Rommel was no exception. The man who would later become "the Desert Fox" and win worldwide acclaim as one of the greatest generals of all time began his combat career as a young lieutenant in the army of Wilhelm II, indistinguishable from thousands of others who crossed the French or Belgian frontier in 1914. Four years later he was one of the most decorated soldiers in the Imperial Army, holder of the "Pour le Merite" (the highest Prussian award for bravery) and a firm believer that "positional [i.e. trench] warfare" was for fools. His credo could be summed up in the old Prussian maxim: "Never ask how strong the enemy is, only where he is -- and march to the sound of guns."
   
   Rommel published ATTACKS in 1937, when he was a lieutenant-colonel in the Reichsheer and commandant of the military academy in Weiner Neustadt. At the time he was already famous in the German army for his 1914 - 1918 exploits, but ATTACKS brought him international acclaim, at least in military circles. In Germany the book made him quite wealthy, and in a sense one can see why: compared to the turgid, half-mystical reminiscences of some of his contemporaries, ATTACKS is entirely without introspection. It is simply a recounting of the innumerable small-unit actions in which Rommel participated in during the Great War. The book's methodical, matter-of-fact style reflects the personality of its author, who was not inclined to philosophizing. The "whys" and "wherefores" of war mattered to him not at all. Unlike Ernst Juenger, who also won the Pour le Merite and wrote postwar accounts of his exploits (THE STORM OF STEEL, COPSE 125, WAR AS AN INWARD EXPERIENCE) Rommel wasn't interested in the "inward experience", just the fighting. He was a soldier's soldier.
   
   During the War, Rommel served extensively in France, Rumania and Italy, and ATTACKS recounts in great detail his many offensive exploits, where he distinguished himself not merely with his aggressive style but by his habit (repeated in World War II) of leading from the front. Utterly fearless, possessing unlimited physical stamina and seemingly immune to pain (his gunshot wounds are described merely as events, like losing the sole of a shoe; the only thing that seems to have caused him real discomfort in the whole war was getting a foot smashed by a boulder in the mountains) Rommel was the ideal junior officer under any conditions, and was rightly worshipped by his men - another trait he enjoyed in the '39 - 45 war. He was further distinguished by his nobility and chivalry, qualities which are more responsible than his military genius for making him beloved among his former enemies. Today, Rommel is the only one of the myriad generals who achieved fame in Nazi Germany who is officially honored by the present day German government.
   
   The strength of ATTACKS lies not merely in the nature of what is being described (battle and more battle) but in the fact that Rommel has no artistic pretentions: he simply records what happened without sentimentalizing or succumbing to the Germanic curse of using 1,000 words when two hundred would suffice. This, however, is also the book's great weakness: all these skirmishes, raids, marches, countermarches, midnight conferences, attacks, retirements, hand-grenade fights, machine-gun duels, artillery bombardments, and climbs up mountain slopes in the rain, snow and blazing sun begin to wear down the reader over time. If it is possible for combat to be monotonous, Rommel occasionally manages to make it so, if only by the staggering amount of it he actually experienced. If Juenger was often turgid and romantic, he was also willing to discuss the lighter side of war - the pranks, the drinking, the philosophical bull-sessions and the endless war against rats, boredom and Prussian discipline. Such humanistic moments would have been welcome in ATTACKS, but Rommel was not inclined to dwell on them. (The closest thing he displays to a sense of humor is contemptuous jokes at the expense of the French and the Italians, neither of whom seem to have impressed him with their soldierly ability.)
   
   So, if you are looking for a pure combat memior, penned by one of the greatest soldiers ever, ATTACKS is the very definition of the bill. But if you want a look "under the helmet" into the mind and soul of a great fighting man, I would suggest supplementing ATTACKS with Juenger's more layered STORM OF STEEL. After all, nothing is more Prussian than obtaining a "total view" of a military situation!



3. Erwin Rommel first learned his trade in the Great War as an Infantry commander. In this work he discusses individual actions he took part in and the lessons he learned regarding modern combat. Most of these lessons are still relevent today, which shows just how observant he was.
   
   The book is illustrated with sketches which were originally published with the book, which is fortunate as the drawings and maps make it possible to follow Rommel's line of thought as he refights these battles. It is not a light read and if you are not interested in military history you probably will not want to put the necessary amount of work into it.



4. Another necessary read for the study of the Second World War--this may be one of the most accessible texts for those just beginning to study the period. The maps drawn by Rommel are useful and clearly annotated: a good model to learn from. His analysis of the actions could be longer, however much they may be implied in the accounts; some passages could have deserved more commentary. I suppose he left that to the military-pedagogues whom he assumed would be able to pick up the baton in the classroom. Infantry Attacks is focused and avoids unnecessary didacticism and borderline self-aggrandizement present in some of his other writings. In sum: accessible, concise and engaging. Highly recommended.



5. Company level actions in WWI. Written by Rommel after WWI, there is nothing about tanks in this book but plenty about taking the initiative and aggressive maneuver. The core of Rommel's later style of warfare is on display here. The English translation is very readable.

5 comments about Stilwell and the American Experience in China, 1911-45.

1. This is a remarkable book and well worth reading nearly four decades after its initial publication. Tuchman is a gifted author and her subject, "Vinegar Joe" Stilwell, is an outrageous, memorable figure. Even readers with a limited familiarity with China or the Pacific theater during the Second World War will find "Stilwell and the American Experience in China" captivating.
   
   Joe Stilwell was, to say the least, an unusual Army officer for his generation. He had a gift for languages and was drawn to career-limiting foreign assignments from the moment in he left West Point. He spoke fluent Spanish and French before he accepted a chance posting to China in his mid-thirties primarily because it offered the opportunity to get out of the country and learn a new language and culture. By the time the US entered the Second World War, Stilwell was the most highly rated Corps commander in the Army, but also had many years experience in China and spoke fluent Mandarin. Although George Marshall wanted him to command the first US ground campaign of the war - the TORCH landings in North Africa - Stilwell was sent to Asia because no one else was better qualified to serve in China, a region of great importance after the British were booted quickly out of Hong Kong, Singapore and the rest of East Asia by the Japanese.
   
   The irony of this book is that Stilwell was at once the best-qualified officer in the US Army to serve in Asia in support of Chiang Kai Shek's KMT Army and also the worst possible choice because of his abrasive mien. On the one hand, no other senior officer had his command of the language, years in country, or understanding of the Chinese culture. On the other hand, no other senior officer was as tactless or boorish - two qualities that do not serve one well in Asia. For instance, Stilwell had the habit of assigning mocking and often cruel nicknames to his tormentors, real and perceived. Almost from the beginning, Chiang Kai Shek, his nominal superior in the China theater, was "Peanut" - an insulting moniker that Stilwell used rather openly and regularly and was well-known by the Generalissimo and his staff, an incredible affront to the Chinese sense of position and authority. Even more insulting and offensive was Stilwell's occasional reference to his polio-stricken command-in-chief as "Rubber legs."
   
   Yet, Tuchman is clearly a fan of Stilwell's. She sees in him the same talent, passion and energy that led Secretary of War Stimson and Chief of Staff Marshall to put him in the role and steadfastly defend him in the face of repeated requests for his dismissal by scores of highly placed US, British and Chinese officials, whose number included FDR himself. But after reading "Stilwell" one cannot help but think that Stimson and Marshall made a mistake in sticking with Joe for so long.
   
   "Stilwell" also reads like a case study in the perils and heartaches of coalition warfare. From the outset, the major allies in the CBI Theater - the US, British and Chinese - were fundamentally at odds over objectives and therefore completely out of sync on strategy. The British did not see the point in bothering with China at all and wanted only to regain their colonial possessions, Hong Kong and Singapore above all, and Burma only if convenient and if it could be done without mixing Chinese and Indian troops. Chiang Kai Shek, on the other hand, had little interest in ejecting the Japanese from China in a bloody, all-out racial war, but rather preferred to stockpile American supplies and allow the US Navy and nascent Air Forces to slowly erode the Japanese war machine. Meanwhile, the US was guided by FDR's dream of seeing China emerge as one of the world's great post-war powers, fully on the side of the United States and committed to democracy. Tuchman stresses repeatedly that the US public, and to a certain extent the US government, was greatly misled on the truth of the KMT regime. The missionary lobby and other important Chiang supporters, including high-level visitors that were successfully hoodwinked, such as defeated presidential candidate Wendell Wilkie, generated a flood of propaganda that gave the average American a wildly unrealistic and positive impression of the Chinese ally. Tuchman contends that Stilwell himself saw the balderdash written about the KMT as the primary culprit in the inability or unwillingness of Washington to change policy once it became clear that the continued support Chiang was a waste of resources and American prestige and position.
   
   "Stilwell" succeeds on many levels and will likely remain in print and widely read for decades to come. It is a stellar blend of biography, military history, American foreign policy, US-China relations, and a case study in coalition warfare.



2. This book is of exceptional quality and stands up very well after nearly forty years. If not for Tuchman, Stilwell, who was one of the best generals in the U.S. Army during World War II, would be lost to history given his unrewarding work in a backwater region.
   
   Tuchman does an excellent job of letting Stilwell speak for himself. His integrity, brilliance, and humble nature come through. So do his pugnacious and combative personality, which while quite useful for a general in an operational command, were counterproductive in China. Having written a book on Stilwell myself, I believe she is absolutely right that he was the wrong man for this posting, which was about diplomacy as much as it was military campaigns. If he had not gone to China, he probably would have lead the U.S. invasion of North Africa instead of Dwight D. Eisenhower. Given their differing personalities and Stilwell's Anglophobia, Vinegar Joe would not have done well there either. He was an exceptionally able military leader, but he needed to be commanding field armies rather trying to be a diplomat.
   
   This book, though, is more than a biography. It is a life and times study with Stilwell being a tool to study the U.S. relationship with China. Many people blamed Stilwell for poorly managing relations with China that ended up weakening Chiang Kai-shek and allowed the Communists to come to power. An easy claim to make since Stilwell died in 1946. Tuchman is balanced in her account and gives Stilwell's critics their moment. She also develops Chiang's point of view and shows that he and Stilwell were pursuing different policies because they had different goals. This leads to her main theme that China has never been under the sway or control of the United States, and that we have many experts on China, and ignore them at our peril. Tuchman was writing with the Vietnam War in mind, seeing Stilwell's experiences as setting in motion events that brought U.S. involvement in that region. That assertion seems a little simplistic, but this book is still highly, highly relevant given the current nature of U.S.-Chinese relations.
   
   With all these points made, this book is not without certain shortcomings. She skimps a bit on operational matters, which is understandable given her focus. While this biography is good, very good, it is not Tuchman at her best. "Guns of August" is better. That comment, though, is like complaining that you won an Olympic gold medal without setting a world record. Most of us would take Olympic gold under those conditions and Tuchman really deserved the Pulitzer she won for this study.



3. As much as I think this books has provided a lot of information/insight during the period, I found author's comtemptuous attidude towards Chinese a bit hard to swallow. In a way, she was somehow biased when she wrote the book. In no way I'm accusing her of distorting the fact, but, how the fact is presented will shape the opinion of a general reader about Chinese. This is probably not the main point of the book, but for a book that has won putlizer prize, I would have expected more.



4. This book very elegantly and faithfully documented the Stilwell's point of view of what happened during this part of history, but it is very one-sided.
   
   First of all, the KMT commanders were not mostly corrupt and incapable like Tuchman had described in this book. A direct quote from TIME artile titled "The Army Nodbody Knows" in the June 16, 1941 issue:
   "...Four years of war have hurt China a lot, but have also taught China a lot. The most spectacular discovery, for a nation in which military leadership has classically been an affair of coin and cunning rather than martial skill, has been that China could turn out first-class officer talent.
   
   There is no younger officer class in the world than that of the Generalissimo's crack divisions. Generalissimo Chiang is 53, Chen Cheng is 41, Chen's Field Chief of Staff is 34. It would be hard to find a divisional or regimental commander in those divisions over 40. Regimental colonels are sometimes in their 20s.
   
   These baby officers are tough babies. They are trim as well-kept guns, big fellows, by Chinese standards, hearty and jolly in rest and brutally energetic in action. They lead in person. With their divisions they clamber up mountainsides which would put most corpulent U.S. colonels hors de combat. In nearly four years of fighting, the young officers have mastered the arts of the field--silent de ployment, timely retreat, sudden concentration, plausible ambuscade, dependable supply of vegetable camouflage..."
   
   But as this book has gone out of its way to emphasize, it is true that Chiang's administration towards the end of the second Sino-Japanese war was becoming weak and corrupt, which eventually led to his lost of mainland China to the Communist. However, this fact needs to be put into context as well. China fought alone for 4 years against a vastly more superior enemy. Therefore many of the best Nationalist Chinese generals were KIA or incapacitated early in the war of resistance against Japan. There were 73 KMT generals KIA during WWII (plus 1 Chinese Communist general), more than any other country Allied or Axis. It is reasonable to assume that many of the KMT military commanders that managed to survive and rise in ranks to the end were more interested in self preservation and personal gain, rather than defeating the emeny. Chiang knew this all too well but could do very little to alleviate this problem, all he could do was execute one or two of them from time to time to warn others not to go too far. So Tuchman's analogy comparing KMT to AVRN is not only inappropriate, but also failed to take into account the context of China fighting a 8-year long war with marginal industrial capacity and grossly inadeqate military supplies. It is a miracle that Chiang did not surrender and broker some kind of peace agreement with the Japanese.
   
   Finally, this book has indirectly proved that Stilwell spent (and wasted) way too much time and energy accusing the KMT leadership and fighting Chiang and Chennault, instead of accepting the tremedous shortcomings of his Chinese Ally and try to work out a less than perfect solution to fight the Japanese. His despise and hatred toward Chiang got to a point when Roosevelt gave Chiang an ultimatum to hand over command of all Chinese armed forces to Stilwell (with explicit instruction to keep this confidential), he rushed to have the letter read out loud in front of all the Chinese and American generals attending a meeting, for the sole purpose of embarrass and discredit Chiang in public. This event led directly to his recall as Chiang replied to Roosevelt that the KMT would rather fight alone than cave in to this ultimatum.



5. How far will the united States go to support a ruler on the words of others? Stilwell was, first and foremost, a soldier; a general of uncommon skills. Not so much the common touch as the respect by the troops for putting them first, their welfare was his top priority. His years in the east made him the obvious choice for the China post. No general has been asked to do as much as he had to do on the political front, treating with allies who were concerned above all for their place in the sun, while at the same time, fighting a tenacious, skilled, dedicated enemy. Surely a harbinger of what was to come in a place tro the north, called Korea.

5 comments about Tigers in the Mud: The Combat Career of German Panzer Commander Otto Carius (Stackpole Military History Series).

1. It is a good book that is a little heavy on rhetoric and a little light on historical content. If you are looking for a battle history, this is not it. Still there is enough content here to interest the casual reader.



2. This is a great book since first page.
   
   The narrative is precise and exciting, you can feel yourself inside the tiger tank with guns blazing across the eastern front.
   
   Mr.Otto Carius is very inteligent and has a great point of view about the war to share with the readers.
   
   It is definitely a must have book.



3. I have just finished reading this very interesting book which was written from the perspective of a highly decorated panzer commander. How refreshing to read a viewpoint from a WW2 German frontline soldier. He tells his story without embellishment, there is no hollywood exaggeration here. Playing down the danger & terror which was part of the Russian front, he calmly relates details of battles he took part in, comparing the pros & cons of both the German & Russian tactics. Until the Tiger tank made an appearance at the front, the Germans had no answer to the Russian T34s & KV1s.
   It was quite clear that he respected the fighting abilities of the Russians while he was less than impressed with the Americans who relied on technology rather than properly trained personnel. And for those that had the impression that the Americans were the good guys, think again. Carius confirms that the Americans instigated a harsh post war policy of starvation & neglect on German POWs.
   I used to wonder how the Germans & their allies managed to fight on multiple fronts against the world's most powerful nations and hang on for as long as they did. The answer I think is to be found in this book, far from being an exception, men like Otto Carius were quite numerous in the German army. These were men who did not shirk responsibility, but did their duty competently both in attack and defence, who were resilient, tough & stoic under all conditions. Their principle motivation came from a strong sense of duty & loyalty to their families, homeland & comrades, qualities which are these days played down and even discouraged.
   The book also gives an insight to the real Heinrich Himmler who listened attentively to Carius's honest assessment of the worsening frontline situation.
   If you want mindless entertainment then watch Hollywood inspired movies & documentaries, if you want the truth then read books written by people who were there, on the frontline, people who survived numerous battles and lived to tell the tale.
   All I can say is that I enjoyed this book enormously, and the one criticism I can make is that it was not long enough.



4. "Tigers in the Mud" I found to be very captivating and I couldn't put it down. I wish someone would make this into a authentic movie, the perils and trials Otto Carius went through was very interesting.



5. I found the memoir "Tigers in the Mud" interesting, but not the best or not the most exciting of the WWII memoirs I have read. I am an avid WWII reader, but not a military historian, so perhaps this book was not intended for me.
   
   For one, much of the book depends on the reader's understanding of the battles and combat situations. I am familiar with some of the major East Front battles, but I think this book would have benefited more from some summaries of the situations before launching into the details. For example, perhaps some more details prefacing "Gatschina had to be given up" would have helped to understand why the Panzer leaders were in the situation they were in. A few more maps might have helped the reader understand the situations.
   
   Secondly, the translation is a bit stilted, and full of German idioms that do not survive literal translation. I see many passages that appear lifeless. "Not a single creature was to be seen in these dead woods." I was also tired of seeing the many quoted expressions. "My 'hungry' and 'freezing' men sat at a table as if in peace-time." Was it really needed to quote hungry and freezing? Either they were or they were not. Even the word Tiger is quoted throughout the book.
   
   I also expected a bit more on the details of the Tiger tanks, or even his earlier experiences with the 38ts. These details are somewhat limited.
   
   In the end, I enjoyed the book for the details and the matters-of-fact that were mentioned, but I expected a bit more of a framework or a lively drama in which the details are given.