5 comments about My Jihad: The True Story of An American Mujahid's Amazing Journey from Usama Bin Laden's Training Camps to Counterterrorism with the FBI and CIA.

1. Firstly, I'd like to state that I loved this book. It was humorous, well written and thoroughly exciting book. The pacing was fast, the language is strong, and peppered with both American slang and Islamic references. For nothing else, it is a fun read.
   I noticed though that many of the other reviewers called Aukai a "terrorist" or a "criminal" in their reviews though. This is not only incorrect, but also shows how jaded these people are. The fact that Aukai, irregardless of religious convictions, was willing to sacrifice his life in numerous countries to simply protect people that he had never met should be indication enough of the bravery and selfless nature of this man.
   Is Aukai a flawless man? Hardly. But this does not make him a terrorist, or a criminal. Being that warfare still exists (Shockingly enough!), Aukai's killing of Russian soldiers is not a crime (At least not any more of a crime that any other soldier has ever commited during a war). I know that it may be a revelation to some of you, but a Moslem can be a fighter without being a terrorist too.



2. After reading this book, I am left with the impression that Collins was nothing more than yet another troubled youth that attempted to use a loophole in a religious ideology to justify his blatant criminal behavior. It also leaves me to wonder that had the scenario been a few years different, if he would not be over there right now in Iraq or Afghanistan trying to kill Americans instead of Russians?
   I am skeptical with the title of this book, "An amazing journey from Usama Bin Laden's training camps to counter terrorism with the FBI and CIA." True it does tell of the author's travels from custody in the California Youth Authority, to training camps in Afghanistan and culminating with the siege of Grozny in Chechnya, but that is about it, a story and not a very amazing one at that. Collins never goes into detail about why he decided to convert to Islam, he just starts out one day while walking the streets of San Diego, enters a Mosque and decides to convert.
   However, in part two of the book, he gives some insight as to why he may have decided to "convert," but never mentions if this is the actual reason or not. He comes from a broken home where his father eventually rejects him at the insistence of a drug addicted step mom and his biological mother is murdered over a drug deal gone bad. He winds up like most troubled youth living on the street and started out with committing petty crimes. He then progresses to armed robbery and an ensuing "shootout." When the police come to arrest him he proudly boasts about the 13 police cars outside and states to the arresting officers "all this just for me?" It seems to me this is the typical ranting of a juvenile delinquent, not a holy warrior. My interpretation is that he uses the religion of Islam and his distorted interpretation of it, to rationalize and justify his delinquent behavior.
   He uses the concept of Jihad to further rationalize his desire to pursue his inherent criminal behavior by wanting to fight the Russians who are occupying Chechnya. My belief is that the same situation could have played out in any part of the world, he just wants to fight, wherever that may take him. When he finally gets to go out on an operation, "the others" have it all wrong, only he sees the impending ambush and he single handedly saves the others by attacking first and winds up getting shot in the leg. Then to top it all off, he becomes a pedophile by having sex with a sixteen year old at the hospital where he is recovering.
   Again, without much of an explanation, he decides that he wants to work as an informant for the FBI against the same individuals he had just recently been fighting with. My assumption on this is that he had become disenchanted with his situation after being shot and he uses it as a ploy to have the government pay for his trip back to the United States. He returns to his wife and daughter back home, but never mentions whether his wife in the States knew anything about his illegitimate "child bride" and subsequent daughter in Chechnya.
   He then continues his boasting about how he is intimately familiar with and easily associates himself with the Jihadist elements in the States and how although he is informing on them, at the same time, he works as their "muscle" on the side for some extra money. Again, he falls on back on what he knows, being a criminal. Lastly, and there is probably some element of truth about having to deal with government bureaucracy, but he never mentions how any of his work with the FBI or the CIA lead to anything productive or any meaningful outcome, just how much money he was making off the taxpayers. Oh, and he does get his troublesome leg amputated, also on the taxpayer dime. It concludes with him having a falling out with the CIA, who he then accuses of trying to have him killed during his last trip to Chechnya.
   He concludes with a smattering of truth that on his final trip into Grozny, as he is actually faced with a true combat situation, he admits to being scared out of his mind. He attempts to save face by telling the reader that he was ordered to return to the States by his commander to obtain "critical" medical supplies. When he returns, his stateside wife leaves him and he is faced with the harsh reality of raising a son and daughter on his own. His illegitimate wife and daughter, whom he left in Chechnya, are never mentioned again.



3. You will not be able to put this book down! He nearly gets killed in several instances, finds himself in the home of enemy combatants, gets caught crossing the border where he's rescued by a mobster, takes a few bullets to his legs, and still decides to return to the front lines! Whatever your feelings about Collins, he is clearly a hero: Most people wouldn't consider dying for their own country, yet this guy goes off to a foreign land to defend its people against the powerful Russian army. The book will also help readers understand what Jihad really is. You'll come to find that the current "jihadist movement" is in fact un-islamic, founded by groups of corrupt people, some of whom Collins describes as not being remotely religious. The book is a bit out of order: Section 2 should have come first. The book also ends on an incomplete note. Nevertheless, you'll get a first-hand account of a war that seems very distant. You'll also come to understand and appreciate the Mujahideen who dropped everything in their own lives to defend people in a foreign land when nobody, including their government, came to their rescue. After reading this book, I couldn't stop thinking about the atrocities that were committed. If anything, we need to make sure this doesn't happen again.



4. My perspective is probably biased by my many years of military service, but here goes. The book reads like a good adventure novel and perhaps gives some insight into the loosely and even chaotically organized management style of many jihadists and their tendency to degenerate from religious warriors into common gangsters. However, it is hard to take the collection of stories seriously, sometimes they read like comics with Collins as a jihadist version of Captain America, minus the cool uniform. The nice thing about comics is that they have distinctive artwork and are not presented as having historical, political and religious significance and the writers are not self righteous.
   
   At any rate, if any of these stories were being spun at the local tavern, the storyteller would definitely earn some free drinks.



5. Aukai Collins has a compelling premise and story, but it really isn't centered around being a covert operative for the US government- in fact, rather than defining the book - that chapter only represents part of Collins' story.
   
   As some point out, this is a readable book - but don't expect too much depth or research into world affairs. This is Collins' personal account and he doesn't try to represent any other point of view. So those looking into more analysis should understand that. For a first hand perspective, it is written in a matter-of-fact style. The first part of the book deals more with Collins trying to join freedom fighters in combat zones. It could be an article from Soldier of Fortune in some ways, the way that Collins talks about handling guns - like a kid in a candy store. We don't understand much of his motivation except that he is Muslim and wants to be there to defend people of his faith. We get more introspection later in Part 2 onwards.
   
   Although sometimes fragmented, Collins does provide a rare insight into a little seen world. For that he must take credit. Overall however, I did find myself wishing for even more insight, but I appreciated that Collins shared his account with his fellow Americans and the world. I wouldn't overpraise the book, but it's certainly readable and engaging, and not a subject one will find much about.

4 comments about Shooting the War: The Memoir and Photographs of a U-Boat Officer in World War II.

1. This book is not strictly about u-boats. It is a masterfully written chronical of a young merchant marine officer's transition from peacetime sailing aboard a luxury liner to the German navy. Only part of the book is about his time aboard a u-boat. Many of his adventures take place in the exotic lands of Malaya, China, and Japan. I have an extensive library of submarine books and sea stories, and I consider this one of the best in my collection. I heartily recommend this to anyone with a sense of adventure.



2. This book is highly recommended for anyone interested in the u-boat war. The author has a very interesting story that starts with his service on an ocean liner at the outbreak of the war. From there he goes to surface raiders and then to u-boats,eventually ending with his internment in the far east when his sub is taken over by japan when germany surrenders. There are books with more text devoted to u-boat battles than this one however the book stands out for the authors unusual oddessy which he does an excellent job in writing about. The author also provides a superb collection of photos taken by himself that provides a great accompaniment to the narrative.



3. Otto Giese had an unusual war. He was a merchant marine officer with a German cruise company when the shooting started in 1939, and the cruise ship he was on was in the Caribbean. His ship attempted to return to Germany, but was intercepted by the Royal Navy and scuttled by its crew. They wound up being interned by the U.S. Navy (entering the U.S. through Ellis Island!) and found their way to San Francisco and then Japan with the idea of being repatriated to Germany through the U.S.S.R. Instead, though, Giese wound up as a watch officer on board a blockade runner which successfully made the run from Japan to occupied France via Cape Horn, rendevousing with a German commerce raider in mid-Pacific along the way.

   Once he was back in Germany, he sought out service in the Navy, in spite of opposition from his employer. He wound up serving as an enlisted man on U-405 through four patrols operating out of Norway against Murmansk convoys. Then he was transferred to officer training, and soon assigned to U-181, which travelled from France to the Indian Ocean via the Cape of Good Hope. Once there, they eventually landed at Penang in Malaysia, intending to restock with supplies needed in Germany and return there later. When they tried to sail back home, the sub's drive bearings failed and they had to return to Indonesia, where they waited out the end of the war. He then spent some time interned by the Japanese in Malaysia, more time as a POW both there and in Britain, before finally returning to Germany. He eventually settled in Florida and became a U.S. citizen.

   This book comprises what is described as a "war diary" kept by Giese. This stretches credulity a bit, and I think it would be better to describe it as a memoir. The author recounts the events briefly, and some of the chapters are so short it only takes a few moments to read them. Sinking of Allied ships is handled in a sentence, perhaps two. There isn't that much information on life on a U-boat during WW2.

   Why then the high rating? Turns out Giese was a shutterbug (camera enthusiast) and kept a Leica camera with him at all times. He managed to develop photos of his experiences and keep them safe all these years, and the book is sprinkled with more than a hundred of them. Frankly, the pictures are much better than the book is, and I enjoyed them a great deal. The book was still good, don't get me wrong, but without the photos would have drawn three stars, not four.




4. I've read more than a few sumariner's memoirs from both the white hats and the black hats and found this one to be fresh and unique. Herr Giese spent his naval career on the sealane less traveled which probably led to his survival and undoubtedly to his singular experiences as reported in "Shooting the War". His near-internment in neutral United States, his escape back to Germany via Blockade Runner out of Japan to his eventual internment in Malaya, richly told in prose and amply illustrated with his contemporary photography (hence the book's title) make for a memorable addition to your submarining bookshelf. I recommend this book to all readers interested in WWII naval warfare, Allied, Axis or otherwise, buy a copy today!

5 comments about To Hell and Back.

1. In my opinion this is one of the best war movies of all time.You really feel like you are there in the heart of the battle.and the burning tank scene is the best of all.A must see.
   
   jim smith



2. I found "To Hell and Back" to be well worth the time and investment. While it could have contained more detailed information about the battles it did a great job of tell the human side of Murphy's campaigns.



3. This is on of the best books ever written about war. I'm a NCO in the Army and I believe that this book should be a preferred read on any soldiers list. I've served in Iraq on the front lines and the emotions that Audie Murphy writes about in this book are still identical in today's war.



4. "To Hell and Back" is an amazing account of Audie Murphy's real-life military service during WWII. As far as the writing style it definitely lacks flare and, at some points, you feel as though you need to put it down for a while just to take a break the from the abuse of English grammar. However, this man's heroics and peril he endured during the course of his service is so compelling that it far overshadows any literative misgivings. To think that the man (almost boy actually) came back and was able to be even somewhat normal is nothing short of a miracle. It's not only worth the money but should also be required reading by every high school history student in this country. This is what it means to be free and what price we sometimes may have to pay in oreder to stay that way.



5. Audie Murphy's story is one of incredible courage and tragedy. The most decorated American soldier who ever lived -- the 2nd most visited grave at Arlington National Cemetary after JFK -- his war experiences would leave with him with nightmares for the rest of his life. One of his wives once said that Murphy always slept with a .45 automatic under his pillow and would have nightmares where he called out the names of dead buddies. SGT York is revered for basically one battle. Audie Murphy was involved in every campaign from North Africa to Germany. While the movie depicts real events, some are somewhat toned down. While he did shoot down the German who killed his buddy in real life Murphy fired so many rounds into the guy that he literally blew him to pieces. His final action, jumping on a burning tank and holding off a German advance does not quite show the incredible courage of this soldier. He held off that attack for nearly an hour. This is why he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Still, a very good movie with Murphy natural playing himself and solid performances from Marshall Thompson and Jack Kelly.

5 comments about General A.P. Hill: The Story of a Confederate Warrior.

1. For those used to Robertson's ponderous and derivitive offerings, this will come as no surprise. His "find" that Hill suffered from V.D. has been readily apparent to anyone who ever read the general's correspondence (and who can recognize a 19th century euphamism). As for the rest, Roberston's factual blunders (like his ridiculous mention of the non-existent shoe factory in Gettysburg) are surpassed only by his uncritical fawning over his subject.

   A. P. Hill was a fine soldier. He deserves a better biographer.




2. General A. P. Hill has been too long ignored by historians despite his pivotal role in the Army of Northern Virginia. Robertson gives us an interesting account of the general's early life and career, including his cadet years at West Point, up until his tragic death just days before Appomattox. A must-read for any serious student of the War and for those interested by the early lives and training of War Between the States heroes.



3. Despite his meteoric rise to command troops in nearly every battle of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia, Ambrose Powell Hill was arguable the Confederacy's most underrated general. Rising from a colonel of a Virginia infantry regiment to Major General in command of the new Third Corps, Army of Northern Virginia, A.P. Hill was perhaps best known for leading his Light Division on a forced march from Harper's Ferry to arrive in the nick of time to save Lee from total defeat at the Battle of Antietam/Sharpsburg. James I Robertson Jr. has thoroughly examined the perplexities of a complex man: one who could display the virtues of righteousness and compassion one moment and become impetuous, childish and unforgiving the next. What is more, Robertson's battle narratives are enthralling, placing heavy emphasis on infantry soldiering in the foulest of weather, rugged terrain and the difficulties of communications in an age when battle communiques traveled only as fast as a man could ride a horse. How a man of Hill's temperament, racked by life-long bouts of illness, and wounds handles rapid promotion, and, at which point reaches a level of incompetence, is the theme of Robertson's compelling story. From the age of twelve, young Powell read the exploits of Napoleon Bonaparte and was inspired to become a soldier. Hill entered West Point in 1842 in the infamous class of 1846. His classmates were Thomas J. Jackson, George Pickett and George McClellan, to name a few. Hill formed an immediate dislike for Jackson that would last for the rest of his life, while forming a close friendship with his roommate McClellan. In 1844, while returning to West Point from summer furlough, Hill contracted gonorrhea in New York City. He was forced to take an extended sick leave home, requiring him to repeat a year of studies. Upon graduation, Hill was commissioned a 2nd Lieutenant in the 2nd U.S. Artillery Regiment.                 Robertson paints Hill's military career after West Point was one of sickness and boredom. In Mexico, Hill came down with typhoid fever that left him bedridden for six weeks. In Florida he would battle disease and boredom for six long years, especially repeated prostate problems associated with the untreatable venereal disease. Because of poor health, Hill requested to be transferred to a desk job in Washington.                 Hill's gift for staff work brought him to the attention of Jefferson Davis. After Succession, Hill not only chose loyalty to Virginia but also saw war as a chance for rapid promotion.                 Hill was appointed colonel in the 13th Virginia Infantry. He drove his men hard, and trained his regiment to the peak of proficiency. This leadership style would remain a permanent characteristic of A.P. Hill and would produce substantial benefits in future campaigns. Robertson shows a compassionate side of A.P. Hill during this period. During First Battle of Bull Run/Manassas, Hill would often be seen offering a weary soldier his horse while he walked alongside. He once noticed a sergeant who was obviously sleep deprived, and allowed him to lie down for a couple hours to regain his strength. These acts of kindness did not go unnoticed by his men. Typhoid fever, measles, mumps, diarrhea, dysentery and jaundice soon ran rampant among Hill's regiment. Much to his chagrin, Hill was held in reserve during the actual battle yet, a rapid series of promotions would soon follow. Hill was promoted to Brigadier General for the Peninsula Campaign. Hill soon gained a reputation for leading from the front in battle, distinguishable by the red or calico "battle shirt" he always wore in combat. Soon afterwards, he was promoted to Major General, commanding the infamous Light Division in the Seven Days Battles. In just ninety-days, Hill went from a colonel in charge of one regiment, to major general in charge of a division. Here, the author begins to raise doubt about how well Hill handled the transition, while weaving a compelling battle narrative. Hill's independent nature soon led to clashes with his two immediate superiors. As already mentioned, Hill despised Jackson and he did not care all that much for James Longstreet either. During the Peninsula Campaign, Hill and Longstreet got into a childish squabble that almost had tragic consequences. A war correspondent had been traveling with Hill's headquarters during that campaign. He wrote a series of newspaper articles that drastically inflated Hill's accomplishments at Mechanicsville and Fraser's Farm. According to Robertson, Longstreet felt slighted after he read the articles. Longstreet then wrote a "rebuttal," via his chief of staff, Moxley Sorrel and sent the letter to be published in a rival newspaper. Sorrel routinely acted as official liaison between Hill and Longstreet. After this incident, however, Hill refused to communicate with Sorrel. Consequently, Longstreet placed Hill under arrest. Hill, accosted Lee requesting he be relieved from Longstreet's command. A series of nasty letters passed between Hill and Longstreet until Hill finally challenged Longstreet to a duel. Lee had to quickly intercede to avoid a disaster. Another episode involved Hill's nemesis, Jackson. Lee had devised a plan for Hill's division to cross the Chicahominy River and attack Union forces at Mechanicsville. Hill was to wait until Jackson, enroute from his famed Shenandoah Campaign, arrived to support Hill's attack. On the morning of the scheduled day of the attack; Hill's division was assembled early and ready for battle. Hill's men waited for hours with no sign of Jackson. Finally at 3:00 PM, General Hill crossed the Chicahominy and advanced towards Mechanicsville without "Stonewall." Hill successfully drove the Federals from Mechanicsville; however, they dug in at Beaver Dam Creek and could not be dislodged. As a result, the day ended in stalemate with Hill suffering a high butcher's bill.Naturally, Hill blamed Jackson for failing to arrive at the rendezvous on time. The relationship between Hill and Jackson worsened, until Hill was ultimately placed under arrest for a second time, and, as punishment, Lee sent Hill to act as rear guard of Lee's army. This is how the Light Division, hitherto marching at the van , would find itself in Harper's Ferry while the Battle of Antietam was under way. As we know, Hill would redeem himself by saving Lee from possible defeat, and command a corps at Gettysburg. A federal sharpshooter ended the life of Gen. A.P. Hill on April 2, 1865, killing him while Hill reconnoitered his forward positions at Petersburg. Robertson's analysis of Hill's vulnerable pride, bordering on disrespect, the childish in-fighting within Lee's command, coupled with forceful battle narrative, makes this book difficult to put down. Five-stars and highly recommended!



4. however I can see how some civil war buffs would feel that this book looks at A.P. Hill through rose colored glasses. A.P. Hill was exactly the kind of general that Longstreet hated, proud, political, overly aggressive...He was passionate about his men and his cause but much like Hood lacked tactical and strategic skills. The corp he commanded at Gettysburg should have gone to D.H. Hill. In 1864 and 1865 he provided steady, reliable service but never distinquished himself.



5. Always in the thick of it
   James Robertson's biography of General A.P. Hill is superb. Writing in a free and easy style, Mr. Robertson bring to life this courageous long dead Confederate Warrior warts and all. To say "Little Powell " was a complex man and general is a gross understatement. He was a brilliant military tactician, good husband and father, loyal subordinate, fatherly commander, yet fiercely proud, easy to take affront, and very demanding. He rose through the ranks from brigade to division commander quickly impressing General Robert E. Lee with his tenacious fighting prowess, tactical acumen, and innate ability to quickly grasp the nature of the battle and to immediately employ his troops when and where they were needed. On more than one occasion General Powell saved the day for the Army of Northern Virginia. He was eventually rewarded with command of the Third Corps and became Lee favorite "fighting" general. Although brilliant at the division level he did not grasp Corps leadership until the end of the war. As a Corp commander he instinctively had to be "in the action" rather than direct the action. This myopic leadership caused some tactical problems, specifically at Bristoe Station. Regardless, General Hill learned through his mistakes and grew as a Corps commander becoming a close Lee confidant. As the war wound on Hill was always at Lee's side. Jackson would be killed at Chancellorsville, Longstreet would go west for several months and then be injured at The Wilderness, and Ewell would eventually be relieved of command, but Hill was always there-Steadfast and loyal. Whenever Lee need a miracle it was Hill that seemed to provide one. It is very interesting that as both Jackson and Lee lay dying and delirious they both called out for Hill.
   General A.P. Hill was a very complex man. He demanded obedience from his subordinates but could be extremely kind and compassionate to enlisted personnel. He could not tolerate cowardice but understood battle fatigue. He could easily take affront if he or his command was demeaned in anyway by a superior, but he never challenged General Lee's leadership or command authority always carrying out his orders to the letter. He could be prickly when ill and ebullient when not. He enjoyed the love of his men and the fear of the Union soldiers. Lee knew he was a gallant, courageous soldiers of the highest order. The Union Commanders knew he was tough, unyielding, and brutal in a battle.
   Much has been written about Hill's illnesses during the war and his supposed "missing in action" occurrences. Mr. Robertson covers this in much detail and points out that in most cases Hill was present for duty and carried out his command functions admirably. He attributes Hill's illness to venereal disease he contracted while at West Point that eventually led to prostatitist and uremia . During the War it plagued Hill but rarely incapacitated him.
   Mr. Robertson did a good job of filling in the gaps of Hill's early life and his loving marriage to Kitty Morgan. It appears that Powell Hill was a loving father and husband who enjoyed having his family close by. He enjoyed a limited social life but had a close relationship to General Lee and several West Point friends and classmates. All in all General A.P. Hill was a dynamic man and leader of incredible talent and loyalty. He was a warrior of the first order whose fighting ability was second to none. If Jackson and Longstreet were Lee' right hand Hill was his sword.
   Excellent Job James Robertson.
   Highly recommended and a must read for anyone interested in the "real" Civil War and how it was fought by the commanders. Much written about General Hill is simply inaccurate and marginalizes just how great a combat leader and tactician this superb soldier really was. James Robertson sets the record straight.

5 comments about Moondust: In Search of the Men Who Fell to Earth.

1. It's hard to review this book. Everyone agrees that it offers a fascinating insight into the astronauts who walked on the moon. This book isn't really asking "what was it like?" because that's been done too many times. Instead, it asked "what was it like for you?" to each astronaut, and got some interesting answers.
   The remainder of the book is mostly about the journey of discovery that the author takes as he realizes that it had a relatively profound effect on his own life. Some reviewers (myself included) buy into this concept and found it made the whole package very engaging. Others (including some of my friends) found it annoying and distracting.
   So, if you would rather just read biographies of astronauts, try the book about Pete Conrad. If you ever wondered, "gosh, whatever happened to those guys?" or "well, what did it mean for the US to go to the moon anyway?" I think this is an entertaining, engrossing and ultimately enlightening read.
   I only gave it four and a half stars because it's not the best book I've ever read, merely one of the most memorable.



2. This particular book does a great job of getting into the insights of the astronauts when they were front page news. Apollo was truly the pinnacle of NASA and Andrew Smith does a great job of creating the aura that still surrounds the 9 men still living, that walked on another world.
   
   I could've done without some of his personal musings, as he paints a picture that you would rather he keep to himself. I have my own personal perspectives and if you didn't grow up in U.K. or CA, you'll probably agree that Andrew should've kept some of his memories out of the pages.
   
   Even with the author's anecdotes, the book is 5 stars and worthy reading for any space history buff.



3. This book turned out to be more about the author than about the astronauts. It was disappointing. The book was also hard to finish. It was uninteresting in most parts. Not recommended if you are looking for insight on the astronauts.



4. This book was very disappointing for all the reasons already stated, factually inaccurate, rambling, author being self absorbed, etc. The title is misleading and should have been "Andrew Smith: My thoughts on the Apollo Program (With an a few astronaut interviews thrown in)".
   
   I give it two stars because some of the interviews were interesting.
   
   Thankfully I borrowed this book from the library and didn't pay for it. I suggest if you're really interested in reading this book that you do the same...



5. The NASA version of the Apollo moon landings is one thing (see the 5 DVD compilation: NASA The Story of America's Courageous Space Explorers!). 'Moondust: In Search of the Men Who Fell to Earth' is another. The cover says a lot. It shows Gene Cernan, Buzz Aldrin, John Young, Neil Armstrong, Charlie Duke, James Irwin, Alan Bean, and Jack Schmitt as heros worthy of being on collectible bubble gum cards. The author Andrew Smith was the perfect age when Neil Armstrong stepped foot on the moon. He was a kid. The moonwalkers are his heros. I was born later and equivalent heros for me are Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Yoda. The amazing thing about Andrew Smith's story is that he's able to actually meet those space-men and to come face to face with the realities of their lives after having walked on the moon. How much was an astronaught's salary? If I were standing on the face of the moon looking up at Earth, what effect would that have on my sense of God? What does a landscape devoid of atmosphere really look like? How does it feel to be alone inside the vehicle in orbit around the moon waiting for your colleagues to return from the moon surface? Especially when you're on the back side of the moon and you have no radio contact with Earth and you're more alone than any other human being in the history of our existence? What do you do with yourself after you return to Earth, after you retire from NASA, after your fame begins to fade away? Maybe you go into liquor sales, start your own religion or maybe you take up a career as a painter obsessively painting scenes from your lunar memories. Andrew Smith is a down to Earth writer who infuses wit, humor, and astute observation into this amazing book that I couldn't put down. Moondust ranks high among my favorite true account books which would also include Al Santoli's 'Everything We Had' and Joannis van Loon's 'The Life & Times of Rembrandt van Rijn'.

2 comments about Unless Victory Comes: Combat With a Machine Gunner in Patton's Third Army.

1. Nice, easy to read account of some pretty intense action. I've read so much about the ETO that I'm starting to read accounts of the same events by different authors. That's pretty nice since I've found that some accounts support each other, and some accounts don't. That shows just how different units that fought the same battle a couple of miles apart could have had a completely different experience. This book adds a really great first person account to the history of WW2. Fans of the ETO will enjoy this perspective. Those less studied will find that Mr. Garrison helps put a face and name to the action that general interest WW2 volumes could never do.
   
   I think you'll enjoy this book enough to reccomend it to someone else.



2. "Unless Victory Comes", by Gene Garrison (with Patrick Gilbert). Subtitled: "Combat With A Machine Gunner In Patton's Third Army". Casemate, Havertown, PA, 2004.
   
   At the very end of his book, Gene Garrison states that "...this book is my memoir. It is not intended to be a definitive history of the fighting in Europe".
   
   The author has accomplished his stated purpose, as he has produced a matter-of-fact memoir that describes his experiences in the European Theatre of Operations. As a young man (one of his chapters is entitled, "Turning Nineteen In Battle", page 29), Gene Garrison describes the journey from stateside, (Fort Jackson), to England and then to France, where his outfit, the 87th Infantry Division, arrived after the D-Day invasion.
   
   Unlike so many other personal memoirs, this author rapidly sums up basic training and then his transfer to the "Golden Acorn" division, which he describes as a reserve division that had not seen action since World War I. Private Garrison was volunteered to be machine gunner, which he describes as good in that there were two men together, but was also bad since the firepower of the machine gun would draw down enemy attention. His description of standing on the back of a Sherman tank, as he fired the top mount fifty caliber machine gun is all presented with just the facts, even as he is pushed off the tank to avoid enemy fire. Garrison's memoir goes on in this matter-of-fact fashion until the end of hostilities in Europe. Then, at the very end of war in Europe, Garrison is diagnosed with yellow jaundice and required to go to the hospital. Very poignantly, as he leaves his comrades, he shouts a farewell to Tony D'Arpino, saying, "...you're the only one left from Fort Jackson".
   
   The chapter is closed with a quote from the front of his book, "When the last man was gone, would there be anyone to miss him?"

No comments about Sweepers Sweepers Man Your Brooms: An Enlisted Man's Story.

No comments about Abraham Lincoln: A Biography.

3 comments about A Black Woman's Civil War Memoirs: Reminiscences of My Life in Camp With the 33rd U.S. Colored Troops, Late 1st South Carolina Volunteers.

1. Amazon says this is out of print. NOT SO! It can be gotten thru the National Parks Service National Women's Museum in Seneca Falls, NY. The woman who wrote this lived an extraordinary life, as a slave child, and as a freed woman. Yet by many standards she is just an ordinary person living her life, doing what she CAN do. It's a nice read. She's not trying to be anybody's heroine, more simply I think she was writing to tell herself who she was, that she could survive, that she could be of service. Neither boring or exciting (so far), simply real.



2. It's a short book (especially when you consider the added historical footnotes and pictures), but very valuable. It's so rare to hear the perspective of someone who was a slave, and who then lived free in the post-war period. Her heartfelt tales of the bigotry of the _post_-war period to me were even more memorable than her focus on the war itself.



3. "A Black Woman's Civil War Memoirs," by Susie King Taylor, was first published in 1902. A new edition, edited by Patricia Romero and featuring an introduction by Willie Lee Rose, appeared in 1988. In that new intro Rose declared, "There is nothing even vaguely resembling Susie King Taylor's small volume of random recollections in the entire literature of the Civil War, or in that of any other American conflict insofar as I am aware." Indeed, this book is a rare and valuable historical document.

   Taylor was born a slave in 1848 on an island off the coast of Georgia. She gained her freedom and worked as a laundress for an African-American Union regiment during the war.

   Taylor recalls how she learned to read and write and then herself became a teacher. She offers fascinating details about her life with the troops. She had many different duties beyond laundry service. I loved the episode where she recalls concocting "a very delicious custard" from turtle eggs and canned condensed milk, and serving it to the troops.

   Taylor condemns the lack of appreciation shown for both black and white Civil War veterans. She also condemns early 20th century racism. Reading her book I was reminded of W.E.B. Du Bois' classic "The Souls of Black Folk," which was first published around the same time; I think the two books complement each other well.

   Taylor ends on a note of hope and pride, noting "my people are striving" for better lives. This book is, in my opinion, an important milestone in African-American literature.

5 comments about Fire in the Night: Wingate of Burma, Ethiopia, and Zion.

1. Having been brought up on stories from my early years about the brave and often forgotten exploits of the Chindits I was very enthused to tuck into this book. Orde Wingate has been the hero of many, not so much because he was a military successful warrior, but because he was wildly unconventional at a time when staid ethics and methods of war were leading to defeats of the western allies on all fronts.

   A fierce Old Testament fear and learning of the bible bread in what would now be called a fundementalist christian family, he blended this with [...] eccentricities like, indifference to appearing nude before his collegues and newspapermen, a complete indifference to British Monarchy and the hierarchical class-bound society and way of thinking. An appreciator of new ideas and probably quite to the left of many of his superiors, he had no hestation in punishing and physically striking his recruits (no matter their colour), and could kill the enemy mercilessly, or order large groups knowingly to their death without a blink.

   Wingate pioneered unconventional warfare with his notion that large unit groups can function in the rear of the enemy for long periods of time if they were self-sufficient and well trained. He eschewed the entire idea of "special forces" as they are often called nowadays. In the end I do not think that he squared the circle large unit action and special forces --- he wanted both and got really neither. His tactics worked rather well against the Italians (but that was no surprise he realised), but they were problematic against the Japanese. The first operation, "Long Cloth" was an unmitigated disaster, with enough adventures from its many participants to fill an entire library (they still make some of the most heart thumping reads available). The entire operation broke down and became in some cases, every man for himself. Wingate himself giving the order.

   His second operation was more problematic. No doubt these operations had significant effect on the enemy and no doubt were very helpful in the taking of Myikyena and Mogang, but I really think that 14th Army would have rolled up the Japanese flank nicely anyway, as they did and win the Battle of Burma with overwhelming firepower and troops as well unmitigated air superiority.

   In the end the Japanese in Burma were beaten by traditional large unit engagements.

   That is not a defeat of the ideas of Orde Wingate, nor do they negate the incredible bravery of the men who served with him. What it does DO however is to put to rest the idea that Orde Wingate was a purveyor of "Truth" -- his ideas were worthy, but they were not the be-all end-all of jungle combat. His developments were prodigeous and his personal bravery never in doubt. But I think that, like Moses, he got involved too much in fanatical devotion to one idea and was willing to sacrifice a lot for an idea. In the case of Moses, his people --- in the case of Wingate, it was often his own troops.

   This books admirably chronicles the multifacted nature of Wingate. It is factual and comes across as neutral as possible, often citing critical sources and those men (also of incredible courage) that did not fall under his spell.

   The narrative is tight and WELL EDITED. Unlike your regular 1000 page biography Smith and Beirman are able to deal with the subject adequately in 400 pages with nothing substantive missing. Also there is just enough detail of almost all of his life. The final 150 pages deals with the Burma campaign the authors are very skillful in their use of detail. They include all of the crucial elements necessary of his many campaigns.

   I found the book to be a very admirable read. I think that it only deepened the questions I have about Wingate --- was he a daring experimenter or a madman? --- I think that one can add, bitterly-troubled person to the heap of other appelations surrounding this man.

   I still ask myself, if this man were my commander would I succumb and become a convert? Would I stand aloof and protest that something is terribly wrong? I do not know, and cannot judge because I was not born at the time these events transpired. I was not a part of this great crusade, the glory they gained or the horrors they endured.




2. Like many sources, this book praises wingate without enough
   careful examination of his flaws. The book focuses mostly
   on three chapters in Wingate's life. It starts with his
   service in palestine in 1936.
   
   Driven by religious fanaticism and his contempt for what
   he saw as uncivilized peoples (arabs or any non-europeans
   really), he attached himself to Zionism and zionist politicians.
   In the process he exceeded or ignored his orders, then after
   politically compromised himself in open alliance with zionist
   groups to a point where he could not possibly serve there.
   His great "vision" for the region was for a "sub-empire"
   with Zionists serving as a sort of spartan military elite
   to subdue and westernize those considered lesser humans. All
   as part of some sort of twisted fanatical vision of christianity.
   
   After having been booted out of Palestine, he eventually ended
   up in Ethiopia where he again ignored his orders. His goal
   this time was to force a royal government on Ethiopia regardless
   of what anyone else thought and in spite of serious reservations
   on the part of politicians and his superiors. His campaign
   was a wonderful "boys adventure" sort of a affair, but in the
   end it was army won the campaign. Wingate's great accomplishment
   was saddling Ethiopia with an unstable and territorially
   aggressive monarchy that eventually collapsed in a bloodbath
   in the 1970s.
   
   After, he went into open revolt against the entire leadership
   of the army in the area. He openly insulted them and held them
   in utter contempt. In his mind, though he had never held
   a position of high responsiblity in the army, he saw himself
   as being some sort of grand illustrious figure. And when
   his campaign of alination, insults and personal attacks failed
   to get him recognition, he attempted suicide. Contrary to the
   book, his megolmania and self-destructive behavior would indicate
   someone with serious problems rather than a great leader.
   
   He was rescued from career oblivion by a friend in India. He
   was sent into Burma in 1942 to see what could be done in the
   way of irregular warfare. For all his bluster, he did nothing.
   And beyond that, while other men were suffering and dying
   on the march back to India, Wingate arranged to be flown out.
   
   Back in India, he was given a brigade to test out his theories
   with. He whined about what he was given in terms of men. He
   only wanted british soldiers. He threw the men into jungle
   camps during the monsoon with the idea that by inflicting the
   maximum amount of suffering and disease, that british men
   who had his opinion been weakened by access to health care
   and doctors in britain would be made strong again. When the
   casualty rate reached over 50%, he moved the men into regular
   housing and they recovered. The book presents the self-serving
   fiction that the casulaty rate declined due to weeding out
   "bad men" when in reality it only improved because the monsoon
   ended and the worst of the camps was abandoned.
   
   Wingate's first mission into Burma served no real purpose. It
   was originally to be part of a broader plan, but when the
   broader plan was cancelled, wingate demanded that the operation
   go ahead anyway as a training exercise. He led the men into
   Burma, put a railway out of operation for a few weeks and
   then led his men deep into Burma where they accomplished nothing.
   Eventually, Wingate executed one of his brilliant strategies
   to solve the situation. He broke up his command and effectively
   gave the order every man for himself. The force or more
   properly what survived of the force returned in small parties
   to India.
   
   Once back, Wingate ignored his men in favor of launching a
   press and publicity campaign on his achivements. He wrote
   a self-serving account of operations and when his commanders
   raised objects to it, he arranged for a copy to be given
   directly to Churchill and the cabinet. Wingate decided to
   bypass the entire army and come under the patronage of
   politicians. The politicans heard about the brilliant victory,
   but they did not hear about the officer running naked in the
   jungle or of the man who believed bringing back flogging was
   necessary for real dicipline.
   
   When he returned to India in the fall of 1943, he fell ill
   because he had recklessly drank contaminated water in north
   africa on the way back. He had been given a blank cheque
   for any resources he wanted for operations in Burma.
   
   However, due to a combination of him being out of the country
   and ill, his operational role in developing the second chindit
   force wasn't very large. Eventually, an plan was thrown
   together for operations in 1944. Rather than being an evolution
   of his supposed theories, it mostly involved a new idea of
   fighting a special operations war with a division-sized formation
   operating from large bases in enemy controlled territory.
   
   Wingate died early on during the operation so its impossible to
   know what would have been the result if he had lived. However,
   the only other time his 1944 strategy was used was by the
   French in Vietnam where it led to total disaster.
   
   Wingate has a number of followers. Obviously, Israelis are
   greatful for the help he provided in forming what eventually
   became their army. There are also those who, like wingate,
   who see the british army as a failed institution and somehow
   see innovation in the form of a man who cut his own throat,
   ran around naked in camp, wanted to bring back flogging and
   credited broader access to good health care in civilian life
   as being responsible for weakening the british soldier.
   
   A good work on Wingate has to deal with the positive aspects
   and the negative ones. Too many draw a one-sided portrait
   (including this one) while sweeping the not so nice parts of
   the story under the rug.



3. Like Lawrence of Arabia, Orde Wingate is a perennially fascinating figure of the later British Empire and era of World Wars I and II. Unlike Lawrence, Wingate was not a literary artist who immortalized his own career, so we rely on biographies to understand him. This work is thorough if not definitive, using a wide array of sources to describe his military/political adventures in Palestine, Ethiopia, and finally Burma where his long-range penetration strategy was most publicized and problematic, but at least partly successful. Such a forceful, idiosyncratic figure will always stimulate controversy, and the authors explore the disagreements well enough, though they cannot satisfy all readers. Why marginal? Wingate's and Lawrence's successes, and failures, occurred in peripheral theaters of both wars. Scholars debate whether such operations significantly influenced the outcome of campaigns in Africa, Southwest and Southeast Asia, or primarily served to expand or protect the Empire. But major (and costly) sea, air and especially land campaigns were essential to winning world wars; the character of 20th century total war effectively marginalized the efforts and the theaters where romantic individualists fought, though they remain dashing, compelling figures. "Fire in the Night" is exciting and deserves 4-5 stars taken on its own terms, but excess attention given to special ops ultimately obscures the nature of Allied triumphs. A. Mockler, "Haile Selassie's War" narrates the 1935-41 Ethiopian conflict. In "Defeat Into Victory" William Slim recounts the inspiring reconquest of Burma, with pointed critiques but general praise for his difficult subordinate. (The authors seem overly hard on Slim in this respect.) J. Nunneley, "Tales from the King's African Rifles" captures well the brutal, unglamorous experience of most Burma veterans.



4. My mother thought Orde reminded her of Stonewall Jackson of American Civil war fame. There are many similarities between the two, but I think Trevor Royle's book title nails his character right on the head. Both Jackson and Wingate were average military scholars, but brilliant field commanders. They had no equal on the field in terms of battle tactics. Both were deeply religious, both eccentric, though in very different ways. Both were Gideons of the supreme, heavenly order. I am convinced if Stonewall were alive today, he would be an ardent zionist as Orde became when his command led him to palestine in pre-WWII years. Orde's first assignment was in the Sudan where he became fluent in Arabic. His Hebrew which he tried to learn was terrible according to Moshe Dayan. His few days in palestine, however, bore much fruit in that he taught the jews of palestine tactics which would help transform the IDF into the amazing fighting force today and which served them extremely well in the immediate days and years following.
   
   Orde's success in restoring the Ethiopian empire to Haile Selassie was definitely Stonewallian. How he routed the entire Italian fascist force residing in Ethiopia with a small force was little short of miraculous.
   
   I don't think Stonewall was as outspoken as Orde and was a bit surprised at how Orde got by with some of his very strong opinions which he was not afraid to voice. That for me was the biggest contrast between the two.
   
   Most important, I think, about Wingate was what he had accomplished in the jungles of the far east where he died in a tragic aviation accident during WWII.
   
   This book was thoroughly enjoyable, is well written, but I defer to the better judgement of one of my favorite Amazon friends and recommend Royle's book as being most accurate as to Orde's views of the jews and palestine. This book was a good prelude to me, a good introduction into the life and character of this most remarkable of British soldiers, Orde Wingate.



5. I would just like to correct two statements of fact in an editorial review of Fire in the Night.
   
   Publishers Weekly states that Wingate is the "only foreign officer to be buried in Arlington National Cemetery".
   
   Whatever his achievements, Wingate is not unique in this regard. There is at least one other foreign officer buried at Arlington, namely, Field Marshall Sir John Dill. He was the British representative on the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee in Washington during the Second World War who died very much in harness and was buried in Arlington as a mark of the respect his US counterparts had for him.
   
   The same review also contains another error - the plane carrying Wingate crashed in March 1944, not 1943.