5 comments about George C. Marshall: Soldier-Statesman of the American Century (Twayne's Twentieth-Century American Biography Series).

1. As other reviewers note, Marshall was one of the greatest men of the 20th century and a model of what our leaders should be. The author does not engage in hagiography, but instead provides a concise view of this man's life in its historical context. Unfortunately, I was hoping for something more comprehensive, yet not as massive as Pogue's exhaustive (exhausting) work.

   Stoller does a good job of describing the footprint that Marshall left upon the world, but not enough about him as a man.




2. The book by Stoler is an excellent,albeit somewhat abbreviated account of the life of Marshall. The format, which discusses a time period and its relevance in US History and the life of Marshall was an excellent choice by the author. The only place it falls short, in my opinion, is in that its not really a critical review - the author never really analyzed Marshall's actions and took him to task for anything, and I find it hard to believe that, while a great man, Marshall never did anything wrong. Nonetheless, anyone who wishes to understand US military and foreign policy in the 20th century needs to read this book.



3. Mark Stoler writes a concise account of the life and accomplishments of George C. Marshall, one of the greatest soldiers and statesmen in U.S. history. The opening lines in chapter one describe how Marshall was the only professional soldier to receive the Nobel Peace prize. Stoler's work provides inspiration to not only those in uniform, but also diplomats and others interested in leadership in general. I found the book highly readable, succinct, yet having the detailed notes that provide guidance for further reading. It is well worth the read.

   Stoler's work comes in at just under two hundred pages, but adds depth with extensive notes for the reader who wishes to pursue more details on the life and accomplishments of General Marshall. The author leans heavily on Forrest C. Pogue, Marshall's official biography, and others who have written extensively on the leader and World War II. The book also features a chronology of Marshall's life, two sets of photos, a bibliographic essay, and an index.

   I found the chapter on Marshall's time as Secretary of State to be extremely interesting. He not only garnered passage of the European Recovery Plan ("Marshall Plan") during his tenure, but he also helped negotiate the Rio Pact and Organization of American States, witnessed Tito's Communist coup in Czechoslovakia, opposed the Soviet blockade of Berlin, and supported the creation of NATO. Marshall's immense impact on world affairs can still be felt in Western Europe and elsewhere, as his military and diplomatic efforts set the stage for international relations for the remainder of the 20th century.

   As a military leader, I found this to be great reading and a good source for future reading on General Marshall. Read Stoler's work if you are a student of history or enjoy reading about leadership. Highly recommended!




4. This is a perfectly unobjectionable book outlining Gen. Marshall's life and military and political careers. It did strike me as being rather cursory in a number of areas and does not go very far in terms of the motivations and character of its subject. Undoubtedly this is in part because Marshall left very little in the way of written reminiscences of his own and kept a studied distance from those with whom he worked. As such, it leaves a bit to be desired as an in-depth biography. Nonetheless, it is well written, fair in its viewpoint and can be read within a couple of evenings. It is certainly a fine introduction to Marshall, but a reader looking for a comprehensive treatment of his life might well select one of the longer alternatives.



5. This is a good biography of the general. If you want more in depth read the masterpiece four volume biography by Forrest Pogue.

5 comments about Guidebook for Marines.

1. I picked this book up second-hand and have found it to be an extremely facinating and informative read. I'm a military brat and naturally find this kind of thing interesting, but I honestly think this book has something to offer for non-military types.

   History buffs will like the history of the Marine Corps that is detailed in it. Outdoorsman/Boy Scouts/etc will find educational material within: instructions on field first aid, orienteering, and field sanitation, among other things. Military or weapons buffs will find complete descriptions and instructions for using and caring for the M-16A2, M-60, M249, and more. Hand to hand combat, anti-armor weapons, mines, explosives, chemical warfare, etc., are also discussed. The purely curious should find the whole book a great read.

   If you're thinking of joining the Marine Corps, or can use, or are interested in this kind of information, this book is worth the money.




2. I ordered this copy for old time sake.I joined the Corps in 1984 and had lost my copy.I ordered this copy hoping to replace the lost copy but I really thought this would be the updated copy.I was upset to get the book only find that it is the 1983 edition.So much has happened to the Corp since '83 that is edition is now obsolete.If you want an updated copy wait for someone who has a used copy to sell theirs.it's cheaper and better.Semper Fi,Devil Dogs.



3. I'm no marine, but this is a great book! Includes everything but hand to hand combat!



4. While many of the chapters contain information that will never change this 20-year-old edition is very outdated for anyone who may be or planning on eing a Marine. There are more recent issues of the guidebook that should be offered as replacements for this antiquated issue.



5. Dated? Maybe. It's an older edition, but it's still a h*ll of a fine guidebook and it won't steer you young grunts wrong. But, to set the record straight, the edition available here is the 17th edition from 1986. The 18th edition didn't come out until 2001. So, I don't know what you think you're missing, or if you think this book here is some throw back to the days of Tun Tavern. Even it was, you'd be well advised to know it like the back of your hand, Devil Dog or Civ alike.
   
   Semper Fi.

5 comments about Spymaster: My Life in the CIA.

1. Ted Shackley spent a career in the CIA during quite interesting times. From Berlin to Saigon to Cuba he was in the thick of the action. He was recruiting spies, managing offices, working on the attempt to overthrow Castro, involved with Chile and much more.
   
   This is not a traditional biography of born, school, married, etc. This is purely the story of his actions within the CIA, what he was doing, and what happened as a result. He also discusses the impact of the penetrations of the CIA by the KGB.
   
   After the discussion of his career is over, Mr. Shackley gives some ideas about the future of intelligence in a non-Cold War mode. He comments on drug and terrorism activities and their differences. He talks of the use of commercial intelligence where the intelligence might help American companies compete.
   
   Finally he comments on the legal structure of intelligence in the US. This includes the eight committies of Congress with authority in this area, and the need for a more centralized control of the numerous agencies now involved.



2. Shackley could have chosen to enlighten us about what he learned as head of CIA's Miami office in the months before and after the JFK assassination. He chose not to do so. There is no mention of many issues raised in other books that he could have discussed to make a major contribution to history. He never mentions Operation 40, or operations against the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (which Oswald made famous by his association with it), or the efforts of anti-Castro operatives to blame Castro for JFK's murder (which he would have known a lot about), or his testimony to the House Assassinations Committee, or his knowledge of operatives, or alleged operatives, accused over the years of complicity in the events preceding JFK's murder. On the other hand, there is ample coverage, with many pictures, of the award ceremonies in his honor, if you are interested in that sort of thing. I wonder why this self-named "Spymaster" bothered to write this book.



3. Shackley tells his tale of a career in the CIA. This is not a biography of everything he did and is not intended to be. There are no secrets revealed here. Instead, is an honest look at what life in the CIA was like for Shackley. In the foreword it is suggest that the word 'My' could have been left out of the title. This is a fair assessment of the book.
   
   The book does not read like a novel, but neither it is a dry retelling of historical events. Instead, Shackley uses many different stories to explain different topics such as the use of Air America, Public Relations and Counterintelligence. Details are left to a minimum. Anecdotes such as having to leave behind his daughter's rocking horse because it was too big for the moving allowance or getting overly drunk at a ritual going away party in Laos show the human side of the job.
   
   Why 4 Stars?:
   Shackley and Finney tell some good stories and show a lot about what it is like to have a career in the CIA. The book is not meant to be a tell-all of CIA operations and it does not attempt to do so; it fits with the no-nonsense manner that Shackley was known for. Unfortunately, about 50 pages in the middle were just plain boring; my advice to readers is to just barrel through them becuase it gets better and there are a few good pieces of CIA life in there. At times, the book follows chronologically, but there is also quite a bit of jumping around. This weak timeline makes it hard to use as a reference. All in all, it does give an account of a CIA Officer's career and what it was like to be involved in those events.



4. I would normally have given this book only three stars for its incompleteness and deception (outlined below), but Ted Shackley was arguably a giant in the clandestine world, and whatever his crimes of omission or commission might have been, I consider this a "must read" for anyone who wishes to move beyond the entry level in the clandestine service. I note with respect that B. Hugh Tovar, himself an accomplished officer, writes the Foreword.
   
   Shackley's career covered all the hotspots, from attempting regime change in Cuba to Berlin Cold War operations to Laos where he excelled while killing tens of thousands, to Viet-Nam where he helped cook the books and ramp up the "report count" (the CIA equivalent of the body count), to Chile to Iran Contra in his afterlife. I pay particular deference to the author's discovery that the combination of US air power for surveillance, mobility, and fire support, with indigenous irregulars, constituted a new form of warfare, one CIA executed well in Afghanistan.
   
   This personal account is grotesquely incomplete. The author has essentially provided a "CIA Lite" account that is not as much fun as Mile Copeland's "Without Cloak or Dagger," not nearly as revelatory as "Blond Ghost" by David Corn, which clearly rankled the author and perhaps drove him to devise this account; and not nearly as detailed as any of the books on Viet-Nam including those by Snepp, De Forest, and of course Allen, whose "None So Blind" is the definitive work. There is no mention of Sam Adams or the author's acquiescence in false force reports demanded by General Westmoreland and the politically-motivated Ambassador. There is also no mention of his role as a recruiter and funder of Zbigniew Brzezinski when the latter was a student here in the USA and Shackley was a Polish-speaking case officer trolling for influentials. The book is yet to be written on the triangle between Shackley, Breziznski, and the mandarins of the extreme right like Dick Cheney, all of whom agreed that the capture of the Caspian Sea energy and the Eurasian region was a priority for the 21st Century.
   
   This personal account is also extremely deceptive. The naive reader who is not widely read or is lacking in professional experience will not be familiar with the very deep literature on drug running and money laundering that was pioneered by CIA officers working out of Laos in the Viet-Nam era, and its subsequent evolution into the Nugen Hand and BCCI money laundering bank activities. Nor is there mention here of the Safari Club or other notorious alliances by select elements of the CIA with South Africa, Argentina, or Saudi Arabia. The account also ignores any reference to the alleged activities of Ted Shackley in running arms to the Contras and bringing drugs back into America via Southern Air Transport, going onwards to Europe to convert the drugs into money and the money into more arms for the Contras (against the will of Congress).
   
   Within this book, the author is at pains to document that he forbade any drug activity to be associated with Air America or any of his operations in Laos, that he conducted spot checks, and on one occasion intercepted and then publicly burned a case of high-grade opium.
   
   He concludes the book with some moderate recommendations for change, but most interestingly for me, as the international proponent for Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), he states on page 282 that the world has changed to such an extent (i.e. commercial access to Russia and China and other previously denied areas) that fully 80% of any secret wish list from 1991 can today be satisfied with overt means, including overt human legal travelers. We agree on this important point, which most of the U.S. Intelligence Community continues to deny.
   
   I read this book with care, in part because as resident in Viet-Nam from 1963-1967, and as a clandestine case officer in Central America during very ugly times, I feel I have walked in this ghost's shadow.
   
   I have three bottom lines:
   
   1) By any standard, this was an extraordinary officer who performed at the very top of the profession as it was then defined. He earned the respect of his Laotian counterparts, and I have absolutely no doubt that those whom he was charged with impressing or serving, were impressed and served.
   
   2) Much of what he did was covert action of questionable legality and value, such as the pin prick sabotage attacks against Cuba, but this was not his fault, it was the fault of an extraordinarily stupid political system in America (Bobby Kennedy exceeded Ollie North on the idiot standard in our world).
   
   3) Finally, we have the question mark. I have no direct knowledge, but I venture to suggest that Ted Shackley, according to multiple accounts in the published literature, was at least indirectly if not directly associated with a number of criminal or extra-legal adventures. I do not believe he profited personally--I believe he felt that whatever he was doing was in the service of his government, but like so many others, I do wonder if he did not confuse loyalty to the system with integrity in preserving the Constitution.
   
   Hence, I believe this book, and the author's life, were one third heroic, one third mundane, and one third highly questionable--not because he lacked honor, but because the system that he served lacked honor.



5. The first few chapters are good. Shackley, via Finley, does provide a nice outline for understanding the various traditional missions CIA is tasked with. Ted provides a much better view of Bill Harvey than I had ever read before.
   
   The book falls short when Ted writes about the Vietnam War. First, Ted claims to have known nothing about CIA involvement in world heroin distribution. Mr. Shackley claims that it was those awful USAID guys who were the cowboys running drugs in concert with some rogue Laotian's. Anyone who has investigated this mess knows that Edgar "Pop" Buell was in charge of this "assistance" program along with his sidekick alleged CIA Sky operative George Cosgrove. They reported to CIA because they handled the military logistics for the entire Laotian area of operation.
   
   A second area of the book, which I found ingenuous was Ted's alleged hatred for the Phong Hoa or "Pheonix Project." Clean Ted claims that he and all of the good CIA staff found Phoenix "repugnant." Shackley looses sight of the fact that Phoenix was the most successful CIA operation of that war. In contrast, Ted's own Sky operations failed miserably by settling for the establishment of listening posts along the Ho Chi Mihn Trail. If Ted had demanded that NVA convoys be interdicted by ground forces from the Mu Gia Pass to Tchepone, the South Vietnamese might have won that sorry war. If you think I am wrong, ask yourself did Shackley fail to become the director because he wasn't one of the skull and bones or was it because Colby outperformed him during the Vietnam era?
   
   The CIA Laotian operations ended up getting generations of Hmong males killed. By the end of the war, CIA was employing boys so young that they could not operate in the field. CIA called them "Hill Sitters" because they were restricted to defensive positions at base camps. There were so few men that Thai mercenaries were utilized to defend these camps from being overrun. How is that for being repugnant?
   
   Anyway, Only real historians need read this book because only someone with prior knowledge will be able to sift fact from congressional testimony. Read "The Blood Road" by John Prados and "The Politics of Heroin" by Alfred McCoy before you read this book.

5 comments about American Warrior: A Combat Memoir of Vietnam.

1. A sobering and provocative account of a difficult time in American History, where unparalled valor and dedication were the norm. American soldiers rose valiantly once again to our Nation's defense, but failed to receive the recognition and appreciation they deserved. The writer has captured that sacrifice and dedication in vivid detail reflecting that teamwork and courage are paramount in combat, whatever theater, whatever war, whatever cost. Well led, well trained and well equipped, the American soldier is "Army strong".



2. THIS IS A GREAT BOOK THAT BROUGHT BACK MEMORIES. DOC TELLS IT LIKE IT WAS AND WAS ONE OF THE BEST COMMANDERS I HAD THE PRIVLIGE SERVING UNDER.



3. Agree that it is one of the very best books written about the Vietnam War. Numerous killings, almost without count, and cold, unemotional narration with no attempts to be anything but a factual report. General Bahnsen told it exactly the way it was, whether you like it or not.



4. This riveting non-fiction book describes leadership, bravery, compassion, dedication, and determination to seek out and destroy the enemy that should be the model for any officer going into combat. Although the setting is the Vietnam War it could just as easily been WW2 or any other war. You will find that this book ranks with anything written about General MacArthur or General Patton. Much of it has applicability for anyone who aspires to be a leader/manager in any civilian occupation.



5. This is one of the best books I've read. Worked this area with the 1st Infantry Division. It was like being there again. Knew a lot of the stories from a friend that was in the ARP.

5 comments about Roll Me Over: An Infantryman's World War II.

1. Mr. Gantter really brings out what the war was like in the European theater of operations. This is the best I have ever read. I highly
   recommend it and it should be required reading in all US history classes



2. I know the villages of Waimes and Faymonville very well as my mother's family came from that area. Gantter obviously took notice of what he saw and experienced there. He mentions people by name who actually existed and tells the readers exactly what these people did at the time. A well written and accurate account.



3. I was asked to purchase this book for a gentleman in our nursing home. He requested this book because he was the character in the book named Shorty and he was there in 1944 and knows the author.
   He is thrilled to have this book.
   Thank you.



4. I rate this book 5 stars because it was so good that I read it twice. In spite of the author's cynical outlook, I found him likeable as he took me with him through his World War II journey across Europe.
   
   Some of the most memorable experiences he shares:
   
   The time he shoots a German from the upper floor of a farmhouse. He sees the figure collapse and lay motionless in a nearby field. The author is sickened, carefully lays his rifle on the plaster-covered floor, and for a moment holds his head in his hands.
   
   The time he and his three-man squad spent the day in a farmhouse surrounded by Germans. After the squad escapes and rejoins the platoon, the other men admire them for their courage and cool-headedness in a difficult situation. For days afterward, the platoon treats the four men like heroes.
   
   The time the platoon liberates a slave labor camp. The joyous inmates bounce the author repeatedly in the air until he loses his backpack and helmet and is covered with plaster from hitting the ceiling. The author weeps with the inmates.



5. One of the greatest narcissistic first person accounts out of the thirty plus I've read and listened to about WWII. Granted, Gantter has an intelligent literary talent for describing first person combat conditions and dreary rear echelon military life. Albeit he propagates the typical self righteous atheist perspective from a self absorbed individualist soldier, similar to that of a modern cynical collage student. Its intellectual poignant imagery reads like the movie you wished you'd left after the first 10 minutes, but you hoped to score with your morally sensitive and sympathetically confused liberal professor girlfriend after the film. He speaks of "not giving moral judgment," however typical of noble empirical hypocrisy, Gantter spews an enlighten bilge of brilliantly formulated hypercritical dramatics, personal, theoretical, and imaginary, throughout his lyrical polemic memoir. It is a wonderfully bias narrative in the philosophical confusion from the psychological guilt in killing and the absolute correct necessity to do so. Truly if the United States Army of WWII had more of these fine two time draft dodger specimens of ambiguous compass principles, aimless willed resolve, pragmatically obtuse, and historically simple minded wonders (plus a University graduate to boot) the Allies would have lost the war. Thank God my dad (an Infantryman) and his four brothers didn't maintain Gantter's personal `perceptive perspective' while fighting in Europe and in the Pacific during WWII. Hey being a University graduate of history myself and an Infantryman of 23 years, the book made me reflect and laugh times...as I used its Sad Sack pages for toilet paper. I think Gantter, being a fellow infantryman would have admired that irony.

5 comments about The Psychopathic God: Adolph Hitler.

1. 
   Psychoanalysis of dead historical figures can get old, fast. This book, which I first saw mentioned in print (probably pre-publication) about 15 years ago, is an exception, though I doubt that anyone would read it straight through.
   
   Hitler's favorite painter was Von Stuck. The author of this book mentions a vignette in which Hitler, upon seeing one of Von Stuck's paintings (of Medusa), gasped "those are the eyes of my mother!" For good measure, both Clara Hitler's photo and a photo of the painting are juxtaposed...



2. Waite's book is (amazingly) still in print after a quarter century. It's sobering to think so many people put credence in his ridiculous Freudian notions. There is nothing revelatory in this book and the errors are predictable and redundant. Putting Hitler on the couch is nothing new, Walter Langer and the OSS produced the first psychological profile of Hitler in 1943. It is still in print and available on Amazon and is much superior to this effort.

   The main problem is that Hitler is dead and putting him through psychoanalysis is problematic, to say the least. I have an innate distrust of non-Germans (or non-German speakers) writing biographies of Hitler, so Waite has a leg up in this department since he does speak and read german. The vast majority of Hitlerian documents have never been translated and a non-German speaker tackles the project with a severe disadvantage. But does Waite use his innate advantage? No, he relies on discredited information, outdated sources and throws in some psychological treatises of his own, which lack credibility.

   Hitler was an extraordinarily complex, complicated personality and the vast majority of historians have missed the mark in interpreting him or understanding him. Waite utterly misses the mark in explaining Hitler's relationships with women. He was hardly a sexual pervert and maintained a monogamous, though neurotic, relationship with Eva Braun for the last thirteen years of his life. The stories in this book of his "perversions" are stale and the product of propaganda from WWII.

   If you want a steady, readable and reliable biography of Hitler, I urge you to consult John Toland's masterful 1976 book. Nothing has surpassed it in the 25 years since its publication.




3. I've read this book twice to make sure I had a reasonable impression of it. I am a historian of Hitler since my Junior High days. This review may not help you because I will not belabor the absurdities and distortions contained therein; I only give it two stars because there are some interesting facts
   about Hitler buried within the falsehoods that predominate.
   A good historian will be able to pick these out and laugh at the rest...



4. This book was very interesting to read. It provides a view of Hitler very seldom discussed in other books. It is important to remember though that most of the author's information was second and third hand information. It provides very little in the way of historical documents and first hand information.



5. Everything Candace scott said in her review reflects my sentiments precisely. Hence, I will not add anything save that, in addition to reading John Toland, one might also explore Alan Bullock, both of whom will give you a much more intelligible and studied read of Hitler, the man who would be god.

5 comments about The Sutras of Abu Ghraib: Notes from a Conscientious Objector.

1. I found Aidan Delgado's willingness to share both his evolving convictions as well as his weakness and doubts throughout the Iraq experience to be deeply touching. His transparent honesty is unexpected and moving. This sifting, without pretense, of the humanity out of the horror of Abu Ghraib gives us all a glimpse of our own potential...either way.



2. This well-written book will hold your attention from beginning to end. A true story that reads like a novel with a range of "characters" that you care about - or strongly dislike. Mr. Delgado helps one to understand the situations and attitudes that make the abuse that took place at Abu Gharib (and other places) possible. He can feel proud that he took a stand to live up to his principles.



3. Aidan Delgado's book is not about THE war - my brother's book is about his war.
   
   Filled with some great moments, many comic and dreadful at the same time, Aidan's book shines brightest when he shows us his war, internal and external, through his eyes and then again through his hindsight.
   
   To some, his insights and reflections may initially come off as precocious if not awkward, but as you come to know the writer, come to see him as he no doubt sees himself, you find the juxtaposition appropriate. A young man too smart and too wise for the insanity of the situation and too self-conscious and self-aware to lose himself to THE WAR. In the tradition of books like "The Way of the Peaceful Warrior" a reader growths along side the writer until, at the books conclusion, you feel the mixed relief and emptiness of "what next."
   
   Even in the writing of the book, Aidan seems to recognize this inherent clash between his youth, his paygrade, his growing wisdom and thoughtfulness and the over-wrought social context into which his words fall. Normally, books like this are penned by seasoned men, graying at the temples and we are ready to accept their memories and insights. Despite Aidan's youth, his "voice" is truly captured in his writing.



4. The Sutras of Abu Ghraib is a vivid description of a soldier's life in Iraq, and also of the life that led him to war and brought him back as a conscientious objector. An American Buddhist serving with the U.S. Army in Iraq, Delgado stuck out among his fellow soldiers as well as among Iraqis, and his book highlights the difficulty of a lonely, disassociated soldier trying to disentangle himself from what became for him an intolerably immoral war. Even if often ridiculed for his Buddhist principles, made to feel embarrassed about his application for conscientious objector, and even called a "terrorist sympathizer", Delgado describes how some soldiers - even the ones he least expected - were honestly understanding and even sympathetic, and this was the real love and brotherhood he found in the Army. Ranging from hilarious accounts of the absurdities of life to gloomy and disheartening stories of the real face of war, The Sutras of Abu Ghraib flies the reader from sandy deserts in southern Iraq, to sunny beaches in Florida, back through the dark bowels of Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, and into the heart and soul of a naïve soldier turned peace activist. A must read for anyone interested in the realities of the war in Iraq and in the hopeful possibility for personal growth and triumph in face of the worst challenges of life.



5. Couldn't put this book down. Delgado tells a touching and troubling story: I was touched by how openly he spoke about his fears and feelings. I was troubled by the reality in Iraq that he revealed. Delgado was relatively fair and honest in portraying his superiors and peers and situation in the Army--it is not easy to talk about such an important moment in your life with objectivity. It shows a great amount of maturity in such a young author.
   
   If you are for or against the war, Buddhist or not---this is a book about the moments in your life that change who you are forever. Delgado's was a beautiful and painful transformation from a confused, naive college student to a Buddhist, veteran and activist.
   
   Everyone should read this book.

4 comments about A Woman's Civil War: A Diary, with Reminiscences of the War, from March 1862.

1. I read this journal/reminiscence during a short period in whichI read several other Confederate women's diaries and reminiscences,and something that made this one particularly significant in my opinion was that unlike some of the other southern women whose writings I read, Cornelia McDonald lived along a major battlefront of the Civil War from the early months on. Thus, although she definitely preferred to have the Confederate forces around her and appears to have retained some bitterness toward the Union government after the war, she had a more complex view of Union soldiers than did some other Confederate women who lived further from the warfront through much of the war. She mentions the kindness of a shoemaker in her town who sympathized with the Union cause but made shoes for her large family of children even though she could not pay him, and at one point she even has a good word for the Union general who heads the forces occupying the town where she lives. The story of her struggle to feed and protect her children, help nurse soldiers, maintain tense but somewhat peaceable relations with soldiers who occupy her home, and support her family when she is eventually left alone is a story of courage, resourcefulness, pain, and gratitude. Cornelia had not lived only the life of a sheltered belle before the war, and despite the chaos around her, she manages to combine practicality and a love of beauty to keep enough sanity to survive the war and go on with family life afterward.



2. I stumbled on Cornelia Peake McDonald when I discovered she was a relation. Of course I had to obtain this book when I was surprised to find her diary(or in this case an edited form of it) still in print.
   
   This book is not for the light hearted history buff that wants the stories of battle. It is the diary of a woman living through extra-ordinary times. A diary that her husband asked her to keep when he announced that their town was going to be taken by the union while he had to go to Richmond. Col. Angus W. McDonald organized the 7th Virginia Cavalry and served on the staff of his friend Jefferson Davis.
   
   The town of Winchester changed hands a few times. As such Cornelia was on the front lines. She had to deal with the union occupiers who were not too gentlemenly with seccesionists. Cornelia refused to turn over her house several times. Food was hard to obtain as access was denied to people that did not take an oath to the union. Yet she talks of union soldiers that violate orders and trade for flour and bread. As a good conferate she does not like the union forces as she describes life on the occupation. Yet she finds decent people that help her to what extent they can. In fact she even spoke up for a doctor that stayed in her house and did not bother her too much and kept soldiers from pillaging too much.
   
   She speaks of fears of the occupation as everyday more and more mistreatment happens as people are forced from their homes. Some dropped in the middle of nowhere without food or money. The fact that women are accosted if they walk around in pairs. You feel hear heart ache at the loss of her youngest child.
   
   Eventually she and her family become refugees to Lexington. You learn of her hardships as she deals with starvation and tried to get firewood for the family. Creating Confederate Candles, spinning wool for clothing. She even had to beg a man to make shoes for her boys.
   
   She was faced with breaking up her family. Especially after the Col. died. She decided to keep them together no matter what. After the war, they learn their homestead was unusable and decide to stay where they are.
   
   You also get to hear about the personalites of the war. She sits in a pew near Stonewall Jackson in church. Dinners with the Ashby brothers, meeting Robert E. Lee after the war. There are others that I will leave for you to find. :)
   
   Cornelia is an interesting woman and a product of her era. She speaks out against slavery and yet is offended by actions of freed slaves. She speaks of the short lived effort of reconcelliation of the North that was destroyed by John Wilkes Booth. At first she is happy with Lincolns death as she thinks he got what he deserved. And yet on reflection she realizes it was a big mistake that will hurt the South. She talks about the abuse of Jefferson Davis and the fact an innocent woman and her innocent son go to the gallows for the assassanation.
   
   It should be mentioned this is not the full diary and the fact she lost some of it as she moved around. Yet her memory is rather good as she rewrote events that were lost. She eventually penned a copy for each of her children.
   
   All in all a facinating read about a tough resourcefull woman struggling to keep and feed her family.



3. This book provides a glimpse into the struggles and mindset of a southern wife & mom and her family during the civil war. Cornelia McDonald's fortitude and faith under extraordinary trials and tragedies is inspirational. We are a homeschooling family and I think this would be an excellent supplement to a high school student's studies of this time period.



4. Cornelia Peake McDonald's diary shows us what life was like for the South during the Civil War. This inspiring story shows the noble character of Mrs. McDonald and the people of the South in general as they fought for their homeland and their beliefs. Most of us can only dimly imagine the hardships they endured with courage, authentic trust in God, and sacrifical help from neighbors and friends--hardships which included battles being waged in their yards, the death of loved ones, cruel treatment, and women with children being driven from their homes as refugees.

5 comments about The Walking Dead: A Marine's Story of Vietnam.

1. This book is fiction and probably, as Pittaway says, "Entertaining". It is not historically accurate and should be listed with other works of fiction.
   
   Five people reviewed the book ahead of me: Pittaway is a professional reviewer and found the book entertaining but could not be expected to know anything about the subject. He is unqualified to argue the historical accuracy of it.
   
   Bill Weidenbacher titled his review "Too much hype" and expressed serious doubts as to the accuracy of it. Bill was there. He would know.
   
   "Reader" is unwilling to stand behind his/her opinions so cannot be taken seriously.
   
   David Anderson labeled his review "The Walking Dead: Misrepresented". Anderson got it right. The book may be a good read as fiction but should be labeled as such.
   
   "Reader" again posting something he/she is unwilling to take credit for. Disregard it.
   
   Five reviews - one (Pittaway) from a reviewer who, admittedly, knows nothing of the facts surrounding the controversy:
   
   Two (Reader & Reader) which seem to be someone from the publisher's office writing unsubstantiated hype to boost sales.
   
   Two from men of Honor and Integrity who know what they are talking about - they both label it as interesting fiction. I add my voice to theirs.



2. Mr. Roberts attempts to capture the essence of the Vietnam combat experience for the noncombatant reader, which can't be done. One has to live it to really understand it. Simply ask any Vietnam Vet and they will tell you...Only those who've "been there" can understand. I find it extrememly difficult to believe that Mr. Roberts lead a recon team, served as a sniper, advised a CAC team of ARVN Rangers, and was shot down and rescued... all in one tour, and as only a PFC. I would rate the book as a work based on limited historical fact, mixed with large doses of personal fictional embellishments designed to entice the reader to purchase more of the author's works. By the way, it was 1/9 who were "The Walking Dead".
   
   Robert J. Syler
   Master Chief Petty Officer, USNR RETIRED
   Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 9th Marines
   Combat Corpsman 1966-'67



3. This book, although interesting reading, is replete with historical inaccuracies. The writers, both Tulsa Police Officers, "borrowed" a title belonging to another unit - that of the FIRST BATTALION, NINTH MARINES. Roberts writes of his service with the Second Battalion and Third Battalion, and even talks of those unit's nicknames, "Hell in a Helmet" (2/9) and "Shadow Warriors" (3/9). There are very few Vietnam Marines living who do not know that "The Walking Dead" was indeed 1/9.
   
   The books title gives a false impression that he served in one of the most famous infantry battalions in the Marine Corps. His book is fiction and self-flattering.
   
   Roberts & Sasser's accounting of the Morley Safer incident at Cam Ne don't match up with the actual incident either. Although 2/9 did operate in that area, it was Delta Company of 1/9 (not 2/9 as Roberts states) that entered the village on the day described in his book. I would know because I was there at the time.
   
   When reserching Roberts claims of being a Marine Sniper I found a website with a photo of his "donated" uniform to an alma mater of his. The uniform had a Rifle "Sharpshooter" marksmanship badge on it along with Vietnam Service Ribbons. I never heard of a "Sharpshooter", or anyone less than a qualified Marine Rifle "Expert" qualifyer ever being selected to be a Marine Sniper either.
   
   I don't recommend this book to ANYONE interested in an accurate war novel. This book is not about the famed "Walking Dead" as it's title implies. I am throwing away my copy.



4. I liked this story about Vietnam. The author spent some time in Vietnam during the early phase of the war (1965-66). What struck me was the comradely focus of his experience. He depended upon his buddies. The Vietnam population was pro-Communist in his sector. Sasser was enraged when the civilian population watched the progress of Marines through their villages and waited for the booby traps to spring. It is no wonder that certain soldiers held grudges against the population when the time came. He was in one village where Cronkite was broadcasting as Marines fired the town. What one didn't see in this village was the weapons cache found in the tunnels and bunkers under the town.
   
   This is one man's experience of the war in its early phases. I liked this very much even though some of the stories are not for some people. This is an interesting read.



5. My criteria for any book is simple. The writing must be excellent. The story must be plausible. And the subject has to be absorbing. This book satisfies my requirements and gets 5 stars.
   
   I was in the military and served in Vietnam. The information in this book is consistent with my experiences and the experiences depicted in similar books about Vietnam. I cant argue if Roberts wuz or wuznt in the Walking Dead Battalion. I dont know. I do know that me and my friends from Vietnam argue about events we experienced together. I served several weeks with one outfit in Vietnam, but was never formally assigned to that unit. Consequently, I dont get invited to their reunions. I spent exactly two weeks in still another outfit, was formally assigned to it, and can tell you almost nothing about it. Some of my friends had similar experiences. They were volunteered for temporary duty elsewhere, and there is no formal record of it. So the issue of "assignment" is irrelevant to me.

5 comments about A Stranger to Myself: The Inhumanity of War: Russia, 1941-1944.

1. More literary than military, more abstract than concrete, Willy Peter Reese's memoir of his experiences on the Eastern Front offers a window into the soul of a man as it and he are crushed by the brutalities of modern war.
   
   Reese provides few details about the tangibles of the war. No comrades or units are named. No dates are given. Few geographical locations are mentioned. Battles are described in the vaguest of terms; the reader doesn't encounter 88s or Tigers, doesn't hear about tactics. For these things, we have to read Guy Sajer or Otto Carius. Instead, Reese is interested in something more subtle, more indefinable, more psychological: as he puts it, "war as an aesthetic problem," specifically, the problem of describing HOW a man experiences war, not solely WHAT he experiences -- how he perceives war and describes it, how his mind, body, and soul change.
   
   As such, the book won't be for everyone, certainly not those who prefer to read about war's technical aspects. Still, Reese offers a unique perspective on the Eastern Front, on World War II, and warfare in general. At times difficult to penetrate, at others repetitive, it is nevertheless worth reading.



2. Ok, this book initially was slow going. Also, it was also unlike any of the German memoirs of the war such as the Forgotten Soldier. Reese was probably much too thoughtful for a regular infantry grunt in the German Army. Also, he mentions his comrades in only two or three entries. Reese talks about the inhumanity of war in Russia. Not only does he describe his unit's description of their brutality, he relates how war in general is inhumane to both civilians and the soldiers that wage it. There are some biting descriptions in this book of retreats that cost the Germans greatly. The loss of life is tremedous, and eventually the soldiers become desensitized to the brutality and loss of life. They make jokes when poking at dead partisans hanging from some trees.
   
   This book reminds me of the Red Badge of Courage. The authors are both literate and highly sensitive people. However, for those interested in the conflict between Red Russia and Nazi Germany, this might be a less than satisfactory read. The loss of Reese in this conflict is sad, and makes a tragic ending, as he loved life.



3. A young soldiers diary of his years on the Russian front. Ending near the time of his death it recounts the price humanity pays for war.



4. This was a very interesting book that was written by an average soldier that had an above average intellect. This young man would have been "somebody" if he had survived the war. Unfortunately, he did not and these pages show his view of the war in the East. The book itself does jump around, but this can be understood since it is written by a 20 year old that is trying to understand something that can't be understood. War. Take it for what it is. These pages were written for himself in order to help him find his sanity. This should be taken into account before reviewing the item. You may not like its format or lack of combat detail, but it is about a soldier of intellect trying to search his soul. It is a moving book if you read it with an open mind. Indeed, put yourself in his boots and out of your comfortable armchair and how would you have done?
   
   Viele Gruesse!



5. Of all the countless memiors written by German veterans of the Eastern Front, A STRANGER TO MYSELF is the most unique I've yet read. It distinguishes itself from the "field gray flood" of nonfiction books on the Russian campaign in two very distinct ways: first, the author, Willy Peter Reese, did not live to see his scattered notes, many scribbled by the light of a cigarette, get published; he was killed in action in Russia in 1944. Second, Reese was not writing a mere litany of combat experiences and behind-the-lines hijinks but rather a deeply introspective, quasi-metaphysical self-portrait of a thoughtful young man in the midst of a war he neither agreed with nor understood.
   
   Willy Reese seems to have been a rather tortured soul well before he was drafted into Hitler's army - he had a tendency to brooding and seems to have been somewhat anguished about the meaning of life, not to mention oversensitive to its vulgarity and cruelty. The military service did not sit well with him, and he nursed a deep disgust for the Nazis and their cult of anti-intellectualism and brutality. By the time he got to Russia he seems to have given up on the human race, which made what he saw and experienced there all the more horrifying for him.
   
   Roughly 32 million people died on the Eastern Front between 1941 - 1944, the majority of them Russian civilians, and Reese himself survived long enough to see enough carnage for 1,000 lifetimes. He expected war to be horrible; what he did not expect was that he himself would willingly perpetrate some of this horror, and learn to do so with a smile on his face. Such was his transformation, from vaguely pacifistic poet to stone-faced hunter of his own species, that he came to feel that he had changed into someone that he did not know - a stranger to himself. Trapped between who he had been and who he was becoming, his only release ("spiritual morphine") came in writing down his experiences, notes which, after his death in combat, his mother would later organize into this book.
   
   American war literature tends to be very straightforward, and so it's no surprise a lot of people feel that Reese was a pretentious pseudo-intellectual trying to impress his audience with his vocabulary and intellect. After all, many of the book's passages are taken up with philosophical contemplations of the meaning of existence, the human soul, the relationship of man to nature, and the cycle of life and death. And Reese is the sort who doesn't step over a rock, he picks it up and contemplates its place in the Scheme of Things, sometimes with a seriousness that may seem silly to a (further) Westerner. This will be very annoying to a lot of readers who want their "war" books heavy on the "war" and light on the half-mystical philosophizing, but what readers and critics must understand is that Reese was merely a product of his times and of his country. German education heavily stressed philosophy, history, mythology, and classic literature, and Germans as a rule have a very deep connection to nature. This tends to effect their writing, and it deeply effected Reese's. You can love it or hate it (or something in between), but you shouldn't view it as affected - it was quite genuine.
   
   A STRANGER TO MYSELF is not without its gripping moments. Like one of his influences, Ernst Jünger, Reese often digresses into turgid rambling, but just like Jünger, these tedious passages almost always give way to beautifully written and vivid descriptions - when Reese describes the horrible fury of the Russian winters, the plagues of lice, the stench of decomposing corpses, the terrible exhaustion and thirst of a long march in the Ukrainian sun, the pathos of a dead soldier "whose rigored hands refused to yield his rifle", you feel these things as certainly as if you were experiencing them yourself.
   
   A STRANGER TO MYSELF is an important book, one which approaches an unbelievably savage conflict from the perspective of a man who was quite aware of what the war was doing to him, but powerless to stop it. And that theme of powerlessness, of being swept along the currents of Fate by forces he did not understand, is part of what makes the book such a poignant and necessary read. The Eastern Front was a hell that only one in four of the German soldiers who served in lived to talk about, and while Reese did not survive, his voice rings very loud indeed.