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

1. 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.



2. 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.



3. "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.



4. 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.



5. Otto Carius tells of his days as a Panzer Commander. He starts his military career driving the Czeck made Pz 38 with a 37mm gun and bad armor and ends his days driving the excellent Tiger tanks. I knew the Tigers were a good tank that needed to be constantly fixed by their crews. However, Otto basically says the ex-Czeck tanks are junk with weak armor and this cost him some savage wounds early in the war.
   
   Otto is both a great writer but delivers a little disjounted story. That should have knocked it down to 3.5 stars (C+ grade) but the machine does not allow it. Example, we go from Otto being an enlisted man on the Pz 38 and "poof" he is an officer. We don't learn a thing about his OBC or anything like that. Now, Germans tended to view their training as secondary to the action. It's like a pro-football player talking about training camp versus the big game. However, training is how a military prepares for a fight and it's always nice to know how the German army did this.
   
   Otto gives day to day living while fighting against the Soviets. First, they lose quite a few soldiers due to slipping and then being crushed by the tracks. Second, the Germans designed the best tank hatch for the commanders in the Panzer III. The first Tiger hatches were too high and made a good target for Soviet PAKs. Otto is quite happy when the Tigers are all retrofitted with improved hatches.
   
   Now, Otto also tells a reader something this reviewer has long suspected; he was not a great tank hunter by design. He was just out in the field so much that he just saw a lot of Soviet tanks. Now, Otto killed more than 130 tanks in his career. But when you break it down to 1941 to 1945 it's not a tank a week. Otto is quite clear about the fact that if you want to get tanks then you must be in the field. Indeed, his company commander is quite upset that he never gets a tank but Otto's platoon and personal tank constantly get kills. It's like deer hunting; if you don't spend time in the field you're not going to see a deer.
   
   Otto was one of the personal reasons why the Soviets didn't break the seige of Leningrad for nearly 30 months. Any time there was an attack you could pretty much count on Otto and either a platoon or company of Tigers to break the back of a Soviet attack.
   
   Strangely, Otto knocks out his share of the excellent Stalin tanks, one of the best tanks of WWII. His gunner always knew the weak spot on the Soviet tanks.
   
   Now, after the war Otto spends time in a Soviet prison. That tale is both brutal and fast.
   
   I liked this story. Otto gives background on the German WWII tanks. In the back of the book you get to see the many awards this excellent soldier received in WWII. Boy, I wish we had soldiers like him on our side.
   
   3.5 stars and a darn fun read.

5 comments about Absolutely American: Four Years at West Point.

1. The author had unlimited access but tells a very unbalanced story.
   
   My main issue is (like Thucydides20) that the academics are totally ignored. That is such a huge part of life at the Point, as various grads have told me.
   
   Also, the regular Honor Code scandals is another point ignored in the book. The book talks about the Honor Code with a "see no evil" mentality. Yet every 10-15, regular as clockwork, there is a cheating scandal related to that code.
   
   While we are at it, there is very little written about the teachers. It is a shame Lipsky chose not to spend any time with them.
   
   I also had major problems with the format of the book, it jumps around way too much. Just when you are starting to get a feel for a cadet, you are jerked away from that person.
   
   I have spent a lot of time at the Point and have great affection for the institution and its people. It is a shame that given unlimited access, Lipsky did such a poor job.



2. While I enjoyed the read from a purely entertaining and pride perspective, I found the book fairly unrepresentative of the Corps as a whole. As a graduate, I know what life at West Point is like, and how the Corps thinks and acts. It is unfortunate that Mr. Lipsky chose such a narrow prism of cadets to portray as the whole. For those who truly want a sense of what life at USMA is like, do yourself a favor and visit.



3. I bought this for my 15yo son who wants to go to West Point. He watched it several times and took lots of notes of what is going to be required of him. Excellent video for any wanna be cadet.



4. 'Absolutely American' is a fantastic book. It brings the reader into West Point and into the hearts and minds of the cadets. The author, a writer for Rolling Stone, begins skeptical of what he might find on the Hudson but leaves fascinated and a bit awed by the young men and women who take on the challenges that West Point puts before them. I thought of going to West Point when choosing a college in 1981. I chose Harvard instead, and I sometimes wonder if I made the right choice. This book tells me I made the right choice but not for the reasons that I had in 1981. I made the right choice because I am pretty darned sure after reading this book that I couldn't have made it through West Point.
   
   One wonders how we continue to produce the kind of people who willingly put their lives on the line for the rest of us. 'Absolutely American' only redoubled my admiration for all in uniform. The book is not merely a cheerleading effort. The author makes clear West Point's faults, and there are many. But they are the product of good intention, and perhaps necessity.
   
   I highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to understand the modern military and/or for those young people thinking of the noblest of endeavors.



5. In its effort to live up to the title, this book goes out of its way to over-accentuate some bad things that have happened which make the very unusual seem usual. The book probably discourages the right type of people from coming to West Point and encourages the type that West Point does not and should not want. The book does a disservice to the vast majority of cadets and graduates. If you want to understand what West Point is really all about, I do not recommend this book. There are others that you can read.

5 comments about My Bondage and My Freedom (Penguin Classics).

1. What are your impressions of Frederick Douglass? What would you say about Douglass observation that "conscience cannot stand much violence? Do you think it was possible to be a good slave owner?Why or why not? Why does Douglass view slaveholders as well as slaves as victims of slavery? Why is education incompatible with slavery? Why do you think the white children's attitude toward slavery is different from that of their parents? How would you describe Douglass attitude towards Mrs. Auld?



2. Standing in line at the Lincoln Memorial, a book beckoned to me that I previously hadn't seen before. The face of Frederick Douglas grabbed my attention; a man that I've respected for many years, encountering him mainly through my study of Abraham Lincoln. On the spur of the moment, I snatched up a copy of "My Bondage and My Freedom", and within a few days, my admiration in Frederick Douglass was transformed from interest to awe.

   Frederick Douglass orginially penned his book as a response to people's accusations that someone as articulate and composed as he couldn't possibly be a former slave. With that goal in mind, Douglass wrote his memoirs, in a straight forward, powerful way. In the book, he painfully and honestly documents the path his early life took; the memories of being owned, how slaves coped during these times, and how he managed to pull himself out of it all.

   While Douglass' life in itself is amazing, (as he describes the amazing process he undertook to learn how to read), what amazed me even more are Douglass' discourses that he sprinkles through the book, discussing relevant issues during the time. In one instance, he addresses the concern about why slaves simply didn't run away from their oppressive situations. It's almost as if you can actually hear the people talking to Douglass and he responding to them.

   This book does not only tell the tale of a truly amazing American, but gives us a unique insight to the times. This book should be required reading in every high school in this country.




3. Having read a biography of Douglass many years ago, I thought I knew his story. Hearing through his pen was an entirely different matter. What a master of the language and insighful set of observations on human nature.
   
   I am a man of many words, but words fail me in my endorsement of this book. The letter to his former master in the appendix is worth the price of the book by itself.



4. Douglass's second, and lengthier, narrative fills in many of the gaps left in his first autobiography: we learn about his mother, his siblings, and more details about his psychological transformation from brute to man. It's quite insightful, as Douglass is careful to relate each of his personal experiences to the innate evil of the peculiar instituition, for both the slave and the slave holder.



5. THIS BOOK IS POWERFUL, ITS SHOCKING, AND IT IS ASPIRING. THERE IS NOTHING ON CHANNEL 11 THAT BRINGS THE HONEST, INSIGHTFUL, VERY REAL ACCOUNT THAT MR.DOUGLASS DOES IN HIS BOOK. FROM SLAVE TO FREE-MAN, THIS IS TRUELY AN AMERICAN SUCCESS. SKIP THE INTRO, AND JUMP INTO IT.

5 comments about Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers.

1. After finishing this book, I think the one thing that I'm left awestruck by is how little we as a country have learned in the intervening years. Daniel Ellsberg's detailed, yet gripping account of how he went from an anti-communist cold-warrior to an anti-Vietman war protestor and activist is, at times draining, at others infuriating, and yet always thoroughly engrossing.
   
   He starts the book detailing how, as a political analyst he was eventually allowed access to some of the most highly classified documentation the goverment has, including the 7000 page collection known as the Pentagon Papers. A highly detailed look at the behind the scenes machinations that led the U.S. to go from an advisory role to the French in Vietnam, to actively participating in and continued escalation of the conflict. Those documents allowed him to see exactly how far from the truth official statements from the various administrations to the public and Congress were, even to the point of outright lying about getting out of Vietnam when they were in fact escalating involvement in the war.
   
   Mr. Ellsberg goes on to inform the reader how his access to this information led him to eventually denounce the war as criminal, how he attempted to help stop it through "proper channels", which led to nowhere, and eventually how he decided to leak the Pentagon Papers to the press, knowing full well the toll that it would likely take on his friends and family. Although, this singular act of courage wasn't enough to stop the war in and of itself, it was a stepping stone to its end.
   
   What struck me most as I was reading, was the incredible similarity to events going on now, right down to almost vertabum administration statements made to the public. At that time, administration officials would question the patriotism of those who didn't support the war. They called papers that printed leaked classified information, and the leakers themselves, criminal and claimed that to do so was harmful to national security. There are numerous other examples, but I encourage you to read the book for yourself. If for no other reason than to learn how easily it is for our elected officials to lie to us, and get away with it.
   
   I wish that after reading this book I could say that we've moved past all of this, that our country has learned and it could never happen again. However, I think the similarities between this dark time in our history and the Iraq war has gone a long way to proving that isn't the case.
   
   Read this book. Even ignoring my view of the parallels to the Iraq war, this is a highly gripping and educational look at the history and policies that led to our involvement in the Vietnam war. It's a viewpoint that you will never see in any dry classroom textbook and I think that everyone needs to learn just how humanly fallible our elected officials can be.



2. A year into the Iraqi war, an increasing number of people are comparing the debacle to the quagmire that was Vietnam. In one interview about the American torture of Iraqi prisoners, even Secretary of State Colin Powell made an unsolicited comparison with the Mai Lai massacre. Most people now acknowledge that the Bush administration has been less than candid about not only the war in Iraq but also its policies and decisions before and after the 9/11 attacks. Enter Daniel Ellsberg.
   
   In this memoir Ellsberg documents how five successive presidential administrations (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon) systematically lied to the American people and to congress about the Vietnam war. His story is especially compelling because (similar to John Kerry in at least this regard), he served patriotically in Vietnam, only to have that experience convince him how terribly wrong his own government was about the war. As a Marine company commander in Vietnam, Ellsberg was an enthusiastic supporter of the war. But two years of wading through swampy jungles, and extended study of classified documents, convinced him that government rhetoric and empirical realities were two very different things. Ellsberg came home and became an outspoken critic of the war, and in an aggressive effort to stop the war he leaked the so-called Pentagon Papers to congress and then to the media, 7,000 pages in 47 volumes of top secret documents.
   
   The lesson? Citizens would be naïve to believe all that its government says or to support all that it does. Christians, especially, believe that Caesar is not God. This was a radical notion in the early centuries of the faith, for in the Roman Empire Caesar was god, and believers paid dearly for it with two centuries of martyrdom. In fact, as Bernard Lewis has observed, it is to Christianity that we owe the novel idea of a distinctly secular state, as opposed to theocracies such as ancient Israel or modern Iran (or emerging Iraq?). If the state is secular and not sacred, if Caesar is not God, if our recent governments have shown their near pathological propensity to lie about matters large and small, and if most all governments must as a practical necessity use brutal and coercive powers to protect national interests and deliberate neglect of the weak where there is no national interest (Rwandan genocide), then it might deserve our allegiance, yes, but also our loyal opposition.



3. Just got it today, but know that my son will enjoy reading it. He loves history and asked for this book specifically.



4. Ellsberg is a driven man--driven toward solving puzzles and righting that which is wrong. The intensity of his intellect and the breadth of his insider experience would have made Daniel Ellsberg an amazing historian of the Vietnam War even if he hadn't become an anti-war activist. The fact that he had--in the end--studied both sides, and that eventually he had access not only to the Pentagon Papers but also the Nixon Whitehouse tapes allowed him to explain the war and its perpetrators with a rare combination of vividness and authority.
   
   Judging from what is written in today's newspapers, the patterns Ellsberg describes in Secrets are repeating themselves in the Iraq War. _Secrets_ deserves to be widely read, as a lesson in courage, as history, and as a warning to those of us who might be tempted to sit back and trust unquestioningly those who would lead us into war then resist bringing us back out.



5. This provides Ellsberg's history behind his release of the Pentagon Papers. Included is (obviously) his motivation and reasoning behind why he thought they had to be released to the press. In addition, there is a discussion of his the papers themselves but, ironically, the weakness of the book was not enough discussion/analysis of the papers and the conclusions reached therein.

5 comments about Company Aytch.

1. This book was written by a Confederate private who served in the Army of Tennessee for nearly the entirety of the Civil War. Published in serial form after the war (one reviewer suggested that his material was written during the war, such as a diary would have been; however, that reviewer is simply incorrect, and the distinction is important enough to warrant mention) and then in book form in 1880, this memoir of civil war experiences from a private's perspective is priceless in terms of primary source material. Watkins is frank and unapologetic, a quality that provides the historian with unique material in terms of dealing with the sentiments that the non-elite confederates often held.
   
   Watkin's candor is probably the most important feature of this work. His hatred of Yankees and often equally strong hatred of some of the Confederate command suggests an individual who probably defies current simple notions of Yankee/Rebel mentality. Watkins is often witty, especially when reflecting upon feelings that we would now understand as being imbedded in "class struggle". Of course, Watkin's frankness extends to his views of blacks and slaves, illuminating an individual who was both racist and yet not in the generally held stereotypical manner.
   
   I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand the Confederate experience from the perspective of the non-elitist point of view. This book would be great for a high school curriculum covering the Civil War era, and would also be a good part of any similar college-level syllabus. This is a relatively quick read (especially when compared to such works as "Mary Chesnut's Civil War" or "The Diary of Edmund Ruffin"), which makes it ideal for those just beginning their exposure to the Civil War or more specifically to the Confederate experience.



2. 
   While this book is not for the beginner Civil War reader it is a must have for those that want to understand just how it must have been. Along with "All for the Union" "Bayonet's forward" and other Company level collections.
   
   This is an editted version and has cleaned up some of the grammer and errors per the author.
   
   Further the text presumes that the reader knows what is going on and makes scant reference to the common names for the battles he fought in or other forms of reference, hence the not for the casual reader comment earlier.



3. My wife and I enjoyed reading this book together. It captured the day to day grind of life during the war years that southern people love to read about. We both recommend this insightful book.



4. This book lives up to its reputation. If you have any interest whatsoever in the Civil War, whether you're from the North or South, you need to read this book. It has an immediacy that's lacking in history books, because the author was there and lived through some of the most hellish events in the war. And the kicker is that he was a great writer... Imagine if Mark Twain had fought in the Civil War and then wrote about it afterward. He has a gift for making you feel the exhiliration, terror, heartbreak, and drudgery of life as an infantryman in the Civil War... with a degree of literacy and introspection that raises the writing above merely a 'this happened and this happened' sort of account. His writing style is very accessible, too- this book is timeless.



5. Sam Watkins is amazing and a part of you wishes he were still around signing books.
   
   There are primarily two first hand accounts of the Civil War that get qouted a lot this one and Eliha Hunt Rhodes's "All for the Union." I like this one the best because unlike the guy who wrote "All for the Union" Watkins never moved beyond the rank of corporal. When Sam Watkin's joined the "glorious cause" in 1861 1,200 marched away from his home town 65 returned including Watkin's himself. Sam states many times that this is not a history of the war, just a few things that have stuck in his memory 20 years later.
   
   The book flows in a mostly chronological order and includes personal observations of Jackson, Bragg, Johnstone, the Honorable Jefferson Davis (who shook Sam's hand) and many others. These accounts are extremely insightful and even eloquent.
   
   There are the accounts of battles in which Watkins fought 1861, Murfreesboro, Shiloh, Corinth, Perryvile, Chattanooga, Missionary Ridge and the darkest of all Frnaklin.
   
   There are also extremely entertaining elements of social history that are not directly related to battles but give you a good idea of how an average solider of the south lived and how they had fun; of these the segment "pass the butter" is probably the most hilarious. Then there is also the story of how Sam was arrested while on leave and one of his old friends from his home town got him out of trouble.
   
   Overall-This book has something for everyone and if Watkin's is correct and this book was not intended as a history it is definatly one of the most entertaining not-histories that I have read.

5 comments about Grant.

1. This is one of the most fascinating books i've read in a while. Smith has a clear grasp of Grant's life. Both his virtues and flaws are given equal attention. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in either the Civil War or the Presidency.



2. This is an excellent and highly readable biography of Grant. However if you are considering the Kindle edition, note that there are some transcription problems:
   
   * Footnotes have been transcribed as inline paragraphs within the main text flow. They are normally included closely after the relevant paragraph, but they sometimes lag by a screen (or even two) and in one place surfaced in a prior screen.
   
   * The maps have been omitted.
   
   * The full original index is included. But since it includes neither hyperlinks to the text, nor Kindle locations, nor even paper page numbers, it is essentially useless.
   
   * The paper version uses indented paragraphs to indicate extended quotes. Unfortunately these show up as normal undistinguished paragraphs in the Kindle version, so I was sometimes surprised to discover I was in a quote, or that I had left one.
   
   * There are also occasional minor transcription glitches such as words being erroneously joined together or erroneously split apart; or sentences erroneously broken into separate paragraphs. But these are relatively minor.
   
   Note that most of these issues aren't due to the Kindle itself: for example it handle footnotes and textual links just fine. The issues are mostly with how this particular book has been converted.
   
   I don't want to overstate the issues: the book is still quite readable in the Kindle edition, and suitable for (say) travel reading. However the various glitches are sufficiently annoying (and the book sufficiently good!) that I have ended up also buying a hardcover version, for browsing and reference.
   
   For the biography itself 5 stars. For the Kindle transcription, only two.



3. After reading Professor Smith's Grant biography, two apparent things come to mind: the same cult of ignorance that has removed George Washington and Eisenhower from the lips of children and TV ditto-heads was responsible for the "overlooking" of this great leader; and, they, the racist, largely-white Establishment is on the march as we wage unnecessary war today with clue-less leaders in charge. This southern biography in one volume does great justice to that 19th Century and our 21st Century that stands on a precipice,serving as a trumpet call-to-arms. From the middle of Grant's memoirs at Vicksburg, I went headlong into this thrilling read, moved many times by its revelations,riveting insertions of quotes that dramatize the action with tremendous clarity. Insightful, balanced and engrossing from beginning to end. Clearly, U.S. Grant was forgotten by those whose sensibilities were offended that one man could be charged with being a Negro-lover, Indian-lover and a unifier. And for once, Jean Edward Smith got it right: the man who masters the battlefield challenges can deftly handle the administrative ones as well, without the meddling of professional politicians and slicksters. Until reading this biography, I was led to believe that the Confederacy was more noble defending the genteel plantation ways and pleasantries against the crudities of Northern pride. Like, how dare they attack Miss Scarlett! The Civil War was much larger than Margaret Mitchell, and Jean Smith builds this biography to a deeper understanding about the war and its cost. Not only does Grant rise in dimension, but he levels off and enjoys a special relationship with Lincoln that is unique and illuminating, before moving into his White House years and retirement.If one needs to know why leadership is empty in the Executive Branch since Eisenhower, you need not look beyond the enemies of Grant's legacy. The standards of conduct,on and off the battlefield, by all participants, their levels of understanding of the cause, especially their civility was so moving and numerous that one is shocked to return to 21st century conduct. There is much to admire about those times and the great man, U.S. Grant. Read this, keep it and learn plenty.



4. I really loved this book. What a great General he was. Very underrated President. Should be ranked right up there. His battlefield skills saved the country.



5. Jean Edward Smith has written an outstanding biography of Ulysses S. Grant, one of the more complex heroes of American history. Grant's complexity does not stem from his own actions, but from the fact that his career as a general is considered such a success while his presidency has always been looked at as an abject failure. Henry Adams had even written that denunciation of Grant, saying, "The Progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant was enough to upset Darwin." Mr. Smith had the good sense to compare what Adams wrote to the earlier thoughts of his brother Charles Francis Adams Jr. who admired the general and called him "an extraordinary man."
   Sometimes history needs to unfold over a longer period of time before a figure can be properly judged. With Grant the fact was that for over 100-years he came out on the losing end of history because he was for Reconstruction and the civil rights of the freed blacks. When Rutherford B. Hayes came into power in 1877 the freedoms of blacks had become a dead issue and Grant was destined to appear a failure in the eyes of history. It has only been with the success of the Civil Rights movement throughout the 1960s that Grant was in a large way vindicated. Finally southern biographers were unable to point to him as a man who picked the losing side of history, and a man who sympathized with blacks and therefore was wrong.
   It is always difficult to attempt to judge anyone or any act of the past by the standards of today. That is why it is hard to condemn George Washington and Thomas Jefferson for owning slaves because it was common-place at the time. They don't deserve any positive press for owning slaves, BUT if they had turned over their slaves while they lived and fought for the freedom of all then they would have been so far ahead of their time to almost not have been real. There was no-such-thing as Virginia planters of the 18th and 19th centuries who refused to embrace the benefits of free slave labor. At least, I do not recall anything of such people.
   Grant is different because while he was President he WAS popular and DID protect the freedoms of people (which is correct even though it was judged as wrong in the south from 1877 to the 1960s). Mr. Smith is actually righting a historic wrong by trying to view Grant as the people of his time viewed him rather than those who came after and detested him for taking what was for 100-years the losing side of history. For instance, if George W. Bush has many biographies written by his supporters (now less than 28% of the population) that help to shape how he is looked at in the future, it would require a writer like Mr. Smith to come in and show that DURING the vast majority of his term, he was not exactly what one would call "popular."
   Re-writing history is a dangerous game and it takes writers like Mr. Smith to set the story straight after it has gone too far astray. In the south for instance, it was around a century or more before there started to be seen positive views of Abraham Lincoln. It is said that history is written by the winner, but really history is written by whoever happens to be holding the pen, and it isn't always the winner. How else could one explain the "Lost Cause" mythology that turned Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman into villains? It is only after carefully dissecting what actually took place that the story can be set straight.
   In "Grant" Mr. Smith has written a biography of the 18th President and first four-star general in the nation's history that is more accurate than a great majority of those that have come before. His biography is free from the anti-Grant bias that flooded the view for so long. However he also does not gloss over faults of Grant. Grant was a man who sometimes drank too much, and Mr. Smith doesn't hide it. But neither does he extrapolate and assume (as many anti-Grant biographers have done) that Grant was a hopeless drunk who stumbled around at all-times and was hardly ever sober. That such views have been accepted by many historians as fact is absolutely ridiculous, and Mr. Smith finally sets things to right.
   In closing, what we get from Mr. Smith is not a biography that overlooks all Grant's faults and pretends that he was a man heaven-sent who never made a wrong turn in his life. Instead we are given the portrait of a man who sometimes trusted the wrong kinds of people too much and who would other times have been better off as President had he sounded his views out amongst the public (especially the Cabinet and Congress). We see a man who as general came close to defeat more than a few times, but who had the nerves and calm to stand his ground. We get an accurate view of a man whose best traits as a general (indeed the fact that he was not easily perturbed in the most trying moments) are what got him into such trouble with historians for over a century. Not only did Grant wind up on the losing side by supporting the rights of black Americans, he showed no remorse for having done so (nor should he have, though it hurt his legacy).
   Time has vindicated Grant in the end and given Mr. Smith the clarity to write a definitive biography of the man from Galena, IL. Finally Grant can be reassessed and while he may never crack the top ten or even top twenty on the list of the greatest presidents of all-time, he at least can leave the likes of Buchanan, Harding, Pierce, and (something tells me) George W. Bush behind at the bottom forever.

5 comments about The Great Escape.

1. This is the (true) story of the efforts of a multinational group of POWs to escape during WW2, and led to what is one of my favourite films.
   
   I anticipated the book to be a bit of a let down after seeing the movie, but it really wasn't. They emphasize quite different aspects, and some parts of the movie were clearly made up with entertainment value in mind (people jumping motorcycles over fences for instance!). I can't blame the movie makers of course, because the compelling essence of this story is the daily slog of tunnelling set against the backdrop of the mind-numbing drudgery of incarceration. No movie could be long enough to get this point across, but the book allows one to build up a better picture of what captivity was like, particularly because it provides such incredible details. I was really struck by the ingenious ways the prisoners found to fake German uniforms and official passes, improvise tools, and build radios and other vital pieces of equipment. The book provides sufficient descriptions to allow you to get an impression of the main characters and camp layout, though I personally would have enjoyed a few photographs of the people involved (good and bad), though I realise these wouldn't have been easy to obtain.
   
   The author has a relatively dry style typical of a historian rather than a dramatist, and at times relates key events remarkably passionately. The book ratchets up the tension without having to try too hard however, and I could sense the tension that existed whenever the guards entered the barracks to check for tunnels. The depression that accompanies every uncovered tunnel jumps out of the page, as does the resolve to keep trying to escape without ever accepting captivity.
   
   I was also pleased that the author described the events some time after the final escape, so that I could see how thoroughly the Allied authorities pursued the main protagonists, and what was their evetual fate.
   
   This book was a fine testament to the memory of the brave men who didn't wilt despite literally years of incarceration in conditions that can best be desribed as spartan. If they had all died without anyone knowing their story the world would be a poorer place.



2. I love the movie the Great Escape and I loved reading the book it was based on. The movie did an excellant job of following the book but reading the book gave me so much more of an understanding of what these men went through and the courage they had. To truely understand the courage these men had and what they went through, you have to read the book.



3. If you want to know how to make something out of nothing, this is the book for you. I've been reading and re-reading this book since early childhood and that's how I learned to make a needed item out of just what was at hand. McGyver had NUTHIN' on these guys.
   
   MRS. Dee Schauer
   Texas



4. It's a shame the publisher decided to put a picture on the cover of Steve McQueen wrapped up in the barbed wire at the end of his big motorcycle escape attempt. Because, you see, that never happened in the TRUE story of the Great Escape contained in this book. The movie (while good) took serious dramatic license, while Brickhill's book presents the facts. And they are quite inspiring and thrilling enough without the addition of fictional elements such as McQueen's stunt riding.
   I first read this book while in elementary school, and was hooked to the extent that I've read it many times since over the decades. A truly outstanding story.



5. The Real Deal! No "Steve Mcqueen" character, but everyone a true hero.The Great Escape

5 comments about Wiser in Battle: A Soldier's Story.

1. All memoirs tend to be self serving and this one fits the usual template. General Sanchez seems never to have made a mistake in his career or his life. And the bureaucratic details with their endless abbreviations and acronyms are sometimes confusing. There are minor spelling mistakes but that's the copy editor's responsibility. All that aside, this is a pretty believable story about an Hispanic guy who came out of the wilderness and rose to command an army in Iraq. The good general doesn't clobber any of his army comrades, although he insinuates, and saves his carefully expressed displeasure for the civilian leadership. Not so much Bush, who comes off as usually sincere, sometimes loony, but for Rumsfeld and the Democrats in Congress, both of whom come out looking like either lying morons (Rumsfeld) or angry but uninformed (Congressional committees). One can question some of his claims but his description of the Marine's abortive battle for Falujah is supported by a recent documentary being shown on the Military Channel. Sanchez was forced to retire and was deprived of a star for political reasons, mostly having to do with Abu Ghraib. He claims to have done the best possible job at the prison and elsewhere in Iraq, given that he was usually 60% under strength. I believed him, but you can judge for yourself.



2. As someone deeply involved in activities for the promotion of the German-American Partnership, I had the good fortune to meet Ricardo and Maria Elena Sanchez here in Germany before Ric was sent to Iraq. I was very impressed by Ric's honesty, humility, devotion to duty and his willingness, despite his unbelievably crowded schedule, to devote quality time to helping us promote cross-cultural understanding. Since he was one of the few high-ranking people that I found really impressive, I followed his subsequent career with great interest. As the tragic events in Iraq unfolded, I knew there had to be more to the story. I am extremely grateful to Ric for having the courage to write this outstanding book. Generations after us will use it as primary source material to help understand how the combination of ignorance, incompetence and hubris exhibited by the Bush administration has so severely diminished America's image in the world and inflicted damage on the country's institutions that will take decades to repair. Ric Sanchez by emphasizing the importance of truth, honesty and self-criticism in overcoming the legacy of our failures has served his country once again in an exemplary fashion.
   
   David T. Fisher
   Former President of the German-American Steuben Schurz Society



3. Lt General Sanchez confirms what the few intelligent American voter suspected. The Neo-Conservatives in The White House and The Pentagon have created a mess in Irag. Now because of field commanders that are finally being shown the respect that they did not receive until General Petraes was placed in charge; there has been more military successes on the ground in Irag.The Neo-Conservatives will soon be out of power after The November Elections. Whether it's President McCain or President Obama; their priorities should be to allow the Generals on the ground control the wars in Afghanistan and Irag and to not politicize the war for their own agendas be they liberal or conservative. LT General Sanchez would make a good Secretary of Defense for either President. He has the experience,the intelligence, and the respect for the Generals on the ground. The fact that he is a Latino would also honor the many Latinos that are in harms way and those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. A country that has yet to accept them as equal Americans. In fact Senator McCain and Senator Obama would be wise to use him as their military adviser during their presidential campaign as soon as possible. A great book, a great public servant and a great Latino role model.



4. Perhaps he was. Certainly he makes a worthwhile case, and 30-plus years of service are not to be overlooked. He's understandably wounded in pride to think that he was forced into retirement while those in our government who should be (that's my opinion, not Sanchez's, BTW) remain in power.
   
   Pride, indeed, just might be this warrior's Achilles' heel. As other reviewers have pointed out, he comes across at times as self-serving and defensive.
   
   But he rightly returns his focus, time after time, to the men and women he led into battle. And though he makes his love for the service quite clear (again, 30+ years), he does not spare their blushes in his assessment of mistakes made, and steps that need be taken to learn.
   
   In the end, though perhaps it could have been edited by about 10%, this book is well worth reading.



5. ...is this book another self-serving attempt to place blame for individual and collective shortcomings elsewhere?
   
   I will say right off the bat that I served under then-Colonel Sanchez when he was a mechanized brigade commander in Kansas in the mid-90's. I found him to be very interested in his leaders' knowledge, skills and abilities, but also felt that the way he went about testing his subordinates at times bordered on complete and total micromanagement. As a brand-new officer, I didn't mind that as much because it told me that he was involved and engaged in what his unit was doing. However, I know it rubbed a lot of other officers and NCOs the wrong way.
   
   His section on brigade command leaves out some important facts about events at Fort Riley in the summer of 1995 and then the subsequent NTC train-up and rotation that I won't go into, but the way the section was written did put me on guard the rest of the way in terms of how he presented his case and what other critical details were omitted.
   
   I will say that I respect Gen. Sanchez as a commander and know that he had his hands full as the V Corps Commander based on the observations of friends who served on his staff. I believe a lot of what he says in his book to be true: his corps was woefully under-resourced due to the belief that the war in Iraq was "over" and the lack of detailed planning for post-combat operations doomed his legacy unit to have to learn on the fly, something that rarely pays off successfully- at least early on in the game.
   
   In Lt. Gen. (ret.) Sanchez's defense, he presided over some important victories in Iraq: namely the capture of Saddam Hussein and the killing of his two sons. Unfortunately for him, the Abu Ghraib scandal proved to be his undoing, no matter that the events occurred at levels well below him.
   
   As is the case with Lt. Col. (ret.) Nathan Sassaman's memoir, I would caution readers not to take everything at face value and understand that with these autobiographies, there is always going to be a modicum of self-serving revisionism. I know that for a fact in this book because I lived through one of the sections and found that LTG (ret.) Sanchez left out a key event that I had always wanted to understand how he viewed it and how it affected him as a commander. I was disappointed that it got nary a mention and truly made me question what else he was leaving out the rest of the way. I was disappointed mainly because in my heart, I truly respected Sanchez as my brigade commander and would have followed him anywhere as a young officer who had yet to serve under anyone else. He inspired loyalty in me, and I believe him to be a good man.
   
   In the end, I thank Gen. Sanchez for his service and believe that he tried his best. He has written a pretty interesting book about his career and life experiences. At the same time, knowledge is power. If this is the only account of the Iraq War you read, then you will come away with an incomplete picture of what happened there during that timeframe and what is occurring now at the 5 1/2 year mark.

5 comments about Band of Sisters: American Women at War in Iraq.

1. While this is a subject that could certainly command a wide reader audience, the stories are so-so, the women portrayed are competent at what they do but don't show much in the way of heroic temperament or charismatic personality. They would show up a whole lot better if the writer had more skill. This reads like high school essays with girlish overtones. The insertion of military terms and jargon where indicated just do not ring true as part of the overall battle experience.



2. I was wondering how you could say the women in this book don't show "heroic temperament"? Do you know what a hero is? Sorry, but John Wayne characters don't exist in real life. Heroes are these women ... the first black female combat pilot in the marines, who strikes a target to save several of our ground troops; women out searching Iraqi women and children who suddenly find themselves in a firefight; Purple Heart winners; women who leave their children behind to serve our country? What else do you want in a hero, might I ask? Sorry they don't ride horses and shoot Indians. These are real life heroes.



3. The author's writing just kind of bugged me, and I see I am not alone. It read like a book one would find in the young adult section of a bookstore. The stories were very good, but I felt the weak writing took away from them. It also seemed as though the author was heavily favoring Marines and making it seem as though other branches of the military are not as disciplined or effective. The book was good and had valuable stories, but it was not what I was expecting.



4. I have to agree with an earlier commenter. This is most definitely not about a band of sisters. The author probably hoped to increase sales by giving it that name. (Sounding like "A Band of Brothers). Did this person do this for a college thesis? There are many inaccuracies in the book ranging from 7 ton trucks to the lack of proper military terminology, (along with explanations for the layman), to going back and forth from standard to metric w/o warning. The author also seems to exaggerate some of the circumstances to make them seem more exciting than they actually were. And pardon my ignorance, but what is an "OB Tampon"? I recently retired from the military as a Army Medic and spent time in the Air Force as well. I'm glad I got this book from my library and didn't buy it. Would have been a total waste of money! If you're looking for something akin to "A Band of Brothers", look elsewhere. This book isn't it.



5. A trailblazing book, Band of Sisters describes the harrowing experiences of our women serving in Iraq. Although the author profiles only twelve women, this book illustrates the complex human machinery needed to fight a war -- men and women working together as a unit. While some have criticized the book's dry prose (Holmstedt's research became a MA thesis in creative writing), the author has done a masterful job of telling her stories.
   
   Kathleen Winters, author of Anne Morrow Lindbergh: First Lady of the Air

3 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.



2. If you want to learn about MacArthur's life, this book works well. However, it goes far beyond that in the detail it provides and the analysis. Manchester provides good commentary on MacArthur, his strategies, and politics. One of the most interesting things was the notion of how much MacArthur had captured the Joint Chiefs of Staff with his Inchon operation, which led to disaster when China got involved.



3. In one volume of slightly over 700 pages, historian William Manchester brought together tireless research, epic lyricism and a timeless artistic flare in this classic biography of General Douglas MacArthur.
   
   MacArthur was a special leader on the battlefield, but Manchester drives past the headlines and does an incredible job in juxtaposing the myth with fact, the positive and negative and the politics of war waged against foreign armies and elected officials in Washington, D.C.
   
   Manchester masterfully guides the reader into an appreciation of this controversial and iconic figure who embodied the American spirit in a lifetime spent striding confidently on the world stage.