3 comments about Ariel Sharon: An Intimate Portrait.

1. This book is the story of a friendship, between a journalist and a major military and political figure. The focus however is on the life, and most importantly public actions of one of the great leaders of modern Israel, Ariel Sharon. The book traces the career of Sharon from the Israeli War of Independence in 1948 to his final actions as Prime Minister of Israel when on January 2, 2006 Sharon suffered a massive disabling stroke. A short while later Uri Dan himself came down with terminal cancer and passed away before his revered friend.
   Dan was for many years accused in Israel of being only a 'yes-man' for Sharon. But that is hardly the case. The book is filled with instances of disagreement in which Dan openly as good friend gave Sharon his critical advice.The greatest difference was in Sharon's decision to make a unilaterial disengagement from Gaza in the summer of 2005. It is interesting that in an earlier section of the book Sharon explains why two of the settlements which were removed were of vital security significance.
   The overall story however is not focused on differences of opinion, but rather on cooperative action in service of a cause and ideal - end both Dan and Sharon believed in with all their hearts, the founding and defending of the state of Israel. It is their total committment to this cause which was at the heart of their friendship.
   Sharon's deeds are so numerous and legendary that it is difficult to know where to begin to chronicle them. He is of all the great Israeli modern soldiers Dayan, Rabin, Meir Har- Tsion, Avigdor Kahalani the one who is great at at every level of operation. He is the founder of the 101 Unit which combatted Arab terror in the fifties. He was the one who formulated the Israeli battle- orders by which an officer ideally goes forward first always saying 'After me" He illustrated more than one time the principle of not leaving wounded soldiers behind . He was of all the Israeli military leaders the one who truly understood the futility of static defense, the Bar- Lev line, and the one whose turnaround action in crossing the Suez Canal in October 1973 turned an Israeli military defeat into a victory.
   Dan was not an armchair journalist but trained specially so as to be able to accompany Sharon on the field of battle. His descriptions of Sharon's control and command , his low sure voice at the most critical moments of battle help explain why Sharon's soldiers so loved and trusted him.
   Dan gives a lot of space here to Sharon's controversial part in the First Lebanon War. He makes a strong case that the Kahane commission and Chief Justice Barak did a great injustice in blaming Sharon for what the soldiers of the Phalangists did to the Palestinians. Dan also describes the famous libel suit in which Sharon unprecedentedly won a retraction from the American magazine 'Time'.
   Sharon has been not only a major military but a major political figure in Israel. He was instrumental in helping found the Likud which in 1977 became the basis of the first non- Labor party led government in Israel. Dan also tells the story of Sharon's massive election victory over Ehud Barak and his struggle to restore badly damaged Israeli security which had come in the wake of the Oslo process.
   Without going into the family story at great length Dan touches upon major events such as the loss of Sharon's first wife , the death in a shooting accident of his eleven year old oldest son. Dan also indicates what was a well- known public fact in Israel Sharon's very successful marriage to Lily who was his principal help and source of support. Though Dan does not speculate upon this many believe that her death from cancer had a deleterious effect on Sharon's political policies.
   Insiders , and close- followers of Israeli politics will note certain emphases and omissions in the book. Dan gives great credit to one Sharon adviser Aryeh Genger while saying next to nothing about the person thought to be Sharon's right- hand man in his last few years, Dov Weisglas. Dan does not say much about the role of Omri Sharon and his influence on his father's politics. He mentions without comment Omri's conviction for election- fraud.
   The book contains narrative sections interspersed with interviews with Ariel Sharon. In these we again see his fighting spirit, his optimism, his dedication to and concern for the security of Israel, his committment to the Jewish people.
   Sharon was by some affectionately and by some pejoratively called in Israel, 'The Bulldozer' He was time and again whether it was in founding the whole settlement movement , or removing Yamit from Sinai the one who could do what no one else would do. Instructively in an early conversation with Ben- Gurion cited in the book, Sharon is asked about Moshe Dayan's appointment as Minister. Sharon says then that he thinks that Dayan is suitable for every position, save one, Prime Minister. And this because Sharon says Dayan tends to avoid taking responsibility. Sharon of course was the opposite of this. He took responsibility and more than responsibility for countless actions taken in the defense of Israel. At times he was ( During the Lebanese War) the most vilified person in Israel.In his last years he was the greatly esteemed leader who would have won reelection in 2006 had he not been incapacitated.
   Uri Dan's last words in this book tell about his reaction to the news of Sharon's second and finally disabling stroke. He said that he began to cry and has been crying ever since.



2. Great insider's view, and basically an awesome history of the entire state of Israel. Well worth the read.



3. I enjoyed this biography of Ariel Sharon. The author, Uri Dan, had been a close friend of Sharon's and had insight into Sharon's thoughts. Much of the book is based on interviews Dan had with Sharon. Uri Dan did not mince words with Sharon about the Gaza pullout and other decisions that were controversial.
   The book was written recently and is fairly current. I found the book to be an easy read and recommend it for those that want to learn about Ariel Sharon.

No comments about Honestly Abe: A Cartoon Biography of Abraham Lincoln.

1 comments about Lincoln's Youth: Indiana Years, Seven to Twenty-One, 1816-1830.

1. For many years this was the standard account of Lincoln's passage from childhood into teenage years and the verge of adulthood. Although the parts devoted to Lincoln may be superceded by a later treatment, Warren's volume contains many details of pioneer Indiana that aren't collected together elsewhere.

No comments about Tag Teaming the Press: How Bill and Hillary Clinton Work Together to Handle the Media (Communication, Media, and Politics).

No comments about The Roosevelt Presence: A Biography of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Twayne's Twentieth-Century American Biography Series).

2 comments about Fidel My Early Years.

1. This book consists of one lengthy speech that El Commandante favored students with at his alma matter, the University of Havanna law school in 1995, and a few long interviews, including his famous 1985 interview with the Brazilian priest, Frei Betto. Gabriel Garcia Marquez has a very good introductory essay, with some personal reflection on his buddy Fidel.
   
   If you are a good right thinking American, you probably consider Fidel Castro an evil dictator, even though most Americans the polls show, favor a lifting of the embargo. Well whether you consider him a monster, a somewhat brutal benign dictator (as I do) or as a holy saint (as Fidel hints he thinks himself at some points in this collection), this book is a fine piece of literature. Fidel is a first rate storyteller, he evokes the images of his life in a simple and clear style and is able to impart to the reader the rather inspiring gusto and confidence with which he went about life in his early years.
   
   Cuba pre-1959 was a very wealthy country and put up some good numbers but most of the wealth was concentrated in the hands of an indiginous elite, significantly tied to American investors. Once the United States grabbed Cuba after 1898, much of the land was handed off cheaply to U.S. investors. Castro describes how his father was an extremely poor Spanish immigrant who arrived in Cuba in the late 1890's as a soldier in the Spanish army that was barbarically trying to repress the Cuban independence movement. His father, Angel, over the years managed by his own enterprize to eventually become a pretty successful landowner out in the sticks of Oriente Province. His mother, a native Cuban, also was extremely poor growing up. His father eventually came to employ a large number of workers in his sugar fields, including some Hatians. He grew up playing with the children of these workers and never was aware of any class distinctions between him and his mates, or so he says. The Haitians, Fidel says, he used socialise with in their mud and thatch dwellings. The workers lived an extremely hard and impoverished life, but these Hatians had the hardest lot of all.
   
   In the 1933 revolution against the dictator Machado, Hatian migrant workers were expelled on the ground that they were taking jobs away from Cubans. Included in this expulsion was the Hatian Consul General at Santiago De Cuba, a mulatto who became Fidel's godfather. As a four, five or six year old Fidel spent some time during the Great Depression in Santiago, as a student in the home of an impoverished teacher and got his first taste of real poverty. The Great Depression years in Cuba made the same period in the U.S. look rather mild by comparison. Many people starved to death. When it set up its neocolonial rule over Cuba in 1902, the U.S. also set up a military contigent called the Rural Guards, which terrorized the peasants. Fidel reminisces how in the elections of 1940, when he was back home, he was assigned the task of visiting the homes of the illiterate workers around Angel's estate and others in the area, explaining to them how to vote for his step-brother as a parliamentary canidate for the Autentico party. The workers on estates ussually voted for whoever their boss told them to vote for. Fidel says he remembers the Rural Gurads terrorizing the peasant voters at the voting booth, making sure that the peasants understood that they had to vote in that election for Bautista and his associates.
   
   He spent his school years in various private Catholic institutions and had a few notable bouts with the authorities after he recieved physical punishment. He remarks that at one point he felt compelled to ask at of curiousity why there were no students of color at these institutions. People of color, of course, in Cuba before 1959, suffered Jim Crow style discrimination. At Jesuit schools in Santiago and Havanna, he, with no false modesty, describes that the priests were deeply impressed with his extraordinary gifts in intellectual fields as well as in sports. Just about everyone of these Jesuits had been a supporter of Francisco Franco in the Spanish Civil War, but nonetheless, he says, he grew close to many of them and deeply admired their austere spirit, their willingness to sacrafice for their students even though they didn't recieve any salary.
   
   His life took a dramatic turn when he entered the University of Havanna Law School in 1945 at the age of 19. In 1944, Ramon Grau San Martin, was elected President. Grau had been a leader in the short lived government of 1933 that tried to enact social democratic measures but was overthrown with U.S. backing by Bautista. Grau and his Autentico party had forgotten their revolutionary roots by this time and devoted the next eight years mainly to murdering their opponents and each other, and embezzling government money at a really astounding level. The Autenticos controlled the administration of the University of Havanna and used gang violence against their opposition. Fidel threw himself into this mess, gradualling setting himself up as the leading student opponent of the Autenticos. He describes one instance, when apparently his struggle with the Autentico gangsters had reached such a point that they were going to kill him if he kept opposing them, he went to the beach and cried. He resolved while he was thus wiping away the tears that he would go back to campus life and face whatever came his way. Actually I think that he probably used the connection of his father-in- law, the United Fruit company lawyer, Rafael Diaz Bilart, to fly to the United States, after there was a bounty on his head by some Autentico gangs for allegedly planning to kill one of their leaders. I'm not sure. Ann Louise Bardach's book "Cuba Confidential" is a really fine book that explores these matters about CAstro's life. Maybe this incident after the killing of the gang leader took place later, I can't remember. Certainly, the people who told such a story to Bardach had a motive to strech the truth.
   
   In any case, Fidel aligned himself with the most progressive forces in Cuban society. He joined the Orthodox party under the leadership of Eddie Chibas, and became the leader of that party's left wing. The Orthodox party wanted to eliminate the extreme corruption that had been an endemic part of Cuban life since 1902 and create a government that respected civil liberties, but it was in favor of keeping the capitalist system. Castro explains that he was really worried about the party because it was being co-opted by big landowners and being dilluted of its principles.
   
   Castro was a leader of the Havanna University organization in solidarity with opponents of the barbaric U.S. backed dictator of the Dominican Republic, Rafael Trujillo. He joined a boat expedition in 1947 that aimed to land in the DR and start a guerilla war but the boat was stopped by the Cuban military as it went out to sea and its occupants were arrested but Castro jumped out the boat and swam to safety before they could get their hands on him. This expedition had been originally funded by the most corrupt minister in the Grau government, Julian Aleman, but some of the latter's rivals in the military called off the expedition after a couple of Autentico gangs massacred each other.
   
   Castro's description of his involvement in the mass uprising in Bogota, Colombia after the assasination of Jorge Gaitan in April 1948 is really extraordinary. He is a first rate story teller as I've said. What is probably most remarkable about this section is how Castro explains, with no false modesty, repeatedly that it was his own extraordary courage and selflessnes that got him through that difficult period, as he tried to organize the people. He led a detachment of revoltees and tried to encourage a mutinous police station, to go on the offensive. No doubt the murder of Gaitan played a role in convincing Castro as did the U.S. backed coup in Guatemala in 1954 for Che Cuevara, that one cannot affect social change for the poor without having the oligarchy or the CIA kill you. Castro had been in Bogota as the leader of a Pan Latin American conference which was supposed to serve as a forum for Latin American students to unite to oppose the British occupation of the Falklands, U.S. control of the Panamma Canal and Puerto Rico and other such banal nationalist issues.
   
   The idea that there is anything admirable whatsoever in Fidel Castro is likey incomprehensible to the average American, who rarely hears any notion in the corporate media that U.S. policy and U.S. foreign investors have served as a deciding factor in keeping the masses of Latin America in extreme poverty and misery. Few Americans, except those in Florida in a mostly positive way, have ever heard of Luis Posada Carilles or Orlando Bosch.
   
   This is a fine piece of literature.



2. Fidel Castro remains one of the dominant political figures of all time, certainly the most controversial and impactful political leader Latin America produced in the 20th century. The Cuban Revolution was an important moment in the history of the Americas, one can easily see it's influence in later movements such as the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, Salvador Allende in Chile and in our own time Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia. "Fidel: My Early Years" is a great collection of material where Castro himself discusses his youth from his childhood in Cuba to his student years up to the time right before the revolution. Political and history students must read this volume which gives a clear insight into the vast intellect and powerful speaking skills of Castro. Colombian Nobel-Prize winner Gabriel Garcia Marquez opens the book with a wonderful essay where he describes his long-time friend and his eccentricities, sleepless working hours, voracious reading habits, passions, angers and hopes. Marquez with true eloquence captures a giant of revolutionary movements. Excerpts from major works such as "Fidel & Religion" are featured where Castro discusses his religious upbringing (mostly from his mother) and the poverty and suffering Cuba's campesinos and blacks suffered under U.S. imperialism. He also makes a point of supporting Haiti, which has also been ravaged by colonial abuse. There are fascinating moments such as Castro's discussions of his time in Colombia where he witnessed the political upheaval resulting from the assasination of the reformist Gaitan who Castro (and many others) suspect was assassinated in a plot hatched by Colombia's elites. The beauty of "Fidel My Early Years" is that we get a true human portrait of a man reduced to the level of slogans, cartoons and demonization by the American press, here we get his actual words and ideas. What we see is a man with an amazing capacity for recording facts, figures, thoughts, philosophies and a brilliant sense of calculation and observation and an appreciation for history. Fidel Castro has already left his imprint on Latin American and world history, but for many in the U.S. he remains a distant, threatening figure, here you get a chance at listening to the actual words because listening is a habit we really lack and very much need in the current world state.

1 comments about The Courage And Character Of Theodore Roosevelt: A Hero Among Leaders.

1. Please be aware: This volume is a retitled reprint in paperback (at the same list price) of the hardcover Carry a Big Stick: The Uncommon Heroism of Theodore Roosevelt (Leaders in Action Series). Below is my review for that edition.
   
   An insatiable reader of books on TR, I was immediately drawn to Grant's TR book by its wealth of quotes from the President (something many authors neglect). Grant is unabashedly hero-worshipping here: no negatives are to be found. If one begins with this in mind it can be accepted and tolerated. Though it is often colored by Grant's conservative ideology (he tags turn of the 20th century politicians with turn of the 21st century labels - and greatly underrepresents some of TR's progressive leanings), it does reveal some facts about Roosevelt's religious convictions and church activities - something that is absolutely ignored in most modern biographies of historic figures. The book is not a chronological account but a look by turns at each facet of the multi-talented and constantly moving President.

5 comments about Vladimir, the Russian Viking.

1. St. Vladimir, prince of Novgorod at age 12 and the great-grandson of Rurik, is one of the most influential (and most mythologized) figures in Russian history. Warlike and ambitious as well as shrewd and progressive, he spread his rule from the Baltic to the Black Sea and from the Dvina River to the Volga. The Orthodox Church regards him as �Equal to the Apostles' and the author, whose books have received a number of distinguished awards, obviously agrees with that judgment. Based on Russian, Greek, German, Icelandic, and Arabic sources, this first-ever complete biography reads quite well -- if one works around the sometimes obtrusive religious message.



2. As other reviewers have noted, religious overtones predominate the last half of the book. Although one would expect some religious discussion in the biography of a saint, the predominance of the author's religious message in the last half of the book overshadows Vladimir's life during the last 25 - 30 years of his life. For example, very little of the biography deals with his relationship with his wives or children. Once has to refer to the endnotes to find out more about them. Although the author's writing style makes the book very easy to read, the apparent lack of objectivity prevents me from giving this book a higher rating.



3. I love this book, and recommend it to friends frequently as a source of cultural information on Kievan Rus'. That said, I never noticed a 'bias' as other reviewers mentioned, and I'm not even Christian! Rather, I felt the author took a 'conversational tone' with his readers, and a number of comments others may read as 'biased' I read as being delivered as if from the point of view of the personages under discussion. From such a stance, the book becomes as engaging as a work of fiction, made all the more entertaining for its framework of history. Certainly, we cannot blame an author for depicting the excesses or biases of the past. And Volkov deserves praise for the accessability of his work, far more so than other works available regarding Kievan Rus'. In fact, his passages describing what it would be like to ride through 10C Kiev are as vivid as an Oscar-winning film. I highly recommend this book for affictionados of Kievan Rus' AND new-come visitors to the realm of Medieval Russia.



4. Enjoyed all my books, all were received in good order and nice condition.



5. Captivating, well-written and respectful to the topic. Volkoff is an Orthodox Christian and this is a tremendous advantage when describing how Orthodox Christiniaty became the religion of the Russian people. He writes with not a little humour and Volkoff definitely did his research. It reads like a historical novel, but nowhere does the author depart from his sober minded relating of facts. Wish we had more authors like Volkoff.

3 comments about The Presidencies of Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore (American Presidency Series).

1. This is the fourth text I have read in the American Presidency Series, and I also rate this one a 5 star. This series provides a detailed overview of what is happening in the country socially and culturally, in addition to politically. I like that I learn not only about the two presidents ; but also, I was given details on many of the other major political figures of the time. An extensive use of primary sources is used, and the author makes an effort to discuss how previous biographers have presented each president, how the presidents have been viewed at different points in history, and how this account sees the presidents. This is a sympathetic biography of both, but the author's assessment is solidly supported with evidence. I am not a historian, just a person reading a bio of each of our past presidents. Interesting, story-telling. I did not find this work boring and dry. It also sets the stage for the Civil War and explores the issues that help build toward war.



2. Of all the presidents, Millard Fillmore may have the worst public perception. There is even a group spoofing him as the most forgettable president in history. I first learned of this group when Johnny Carson mentioned it during a monologue on an episode of the Tonight Show. It is of course absolutely false; Fillmore was a strong president with deeply held beliefs who acted in the best interests of the country. While he was a New Yorker and personally despised slavery, Fillmore upheld the great compromise of 1850 and continued the policies of Zachary Taylor.
   Taylor was the owner of many slaves, but all indications are that he was a very benevolent owner. He was also a pragmatist, understanding all too well that economic conditions dictated that slavery was not viable in the newly acquired western territories. Above all else, he was a unionist, stating in no uncertain terms that he would use federal troops against anyone who tried to break the union. As a former general, he was very credible when he threatened to personally lead federal troops in the potential battle between New Mexico and Texas. All through the years of the presidencies of Taylor and Fillmore, there is the clear movement towards the war that broke out ten years later.
   Both men have traditionally been ranked in the bottom level of presidents, largely due to the terrible events of the civil war. Smith is absolutely right in going beyond this simplistic view and explaining the tremendous successes that both men achieved as president. The circumstances were beginning to spiral out of control and three political giants; Henry Clay, Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun all were passing from the scene. Even in retrospect, it is hard to see how they could have done more to preserve the union. Two great tragedies that helped lead to the civil war are explained in great detail. The death of Taylor after only sixteen months in office was a disaster. If he had survived and served two terms, it is very possible that the lurch toward sectional war could have been held in check. As a southern slaveholder and a strong unionist Taylor had credibility to oppose southern secessionists that few others had. His last complete year in office would have been 1956, and the Whig party would have survived. The demise of the Whig party was the key disaster, as it led to the rise of the Republican Party, which had trivial support in the slaveholding areas. While the Whig party had enormous internal problems, the fact that they could elect southern slaveholders to the presidency demonstrates that they were a national party.
   While the events that came after their term in office must be included in any historical analysis of a president, a sensible sense of perspective must be maintained. Other people rise to hold political offices and their actions have more effect on events than their predecessors do. Taylor and Fillmore have been maligned for events that were largely beyond their control. Yes, there were things that they could have done differently while in office that could have helped heal the growing sectional rifts. However, on balance their presidencies were more successful than they have traditionally been given credit for. Smith breaks with that tradition, by concentrating on what they did, he describes two men who held the rudder of state on as even a keel as was humanly possible. Those were times of great looming dangers; they fought them with great skill and determination. Unfortunately, they passed from the scene all too quickly.



3. This is another in the American Presidency series. Elbert Smith examines two of the lesser known and lower rated chief executives--Zachary Taylor ("Old Rough and Ready") and Millard Fillmore. By the end of the book, the author had convinced me that these two deserve higher ratings than most historians are willing to grant them.
   
   The book begins by noting the ethos of the times when Taylor ascended to the presidency, with Millard Fillmore as his V-P. Smith says (page 1): "The United States in 1848 was a nation of many paradoxes. The prevailing mood of those who expressed themselves publicly was one of exuberant pride and optimism, but for many these feelings were tempered by bad conscience, hurt pride, and angry resentments." Taylor and Fillmore presided over a country badly divided by region and the issue of race, and there was talk of secession throughout much of their term. It was also a time of dramatic change, with the railroad beginning to change internal movement of people and goods, with newly invented farm tools making agriculture more productive, and with the telegraph presaging much more rapid communication.
   
   The book begins by providing historical context: the changing technology of the era, as already noted; the political climate; the increasingly touchy Southern defensiveness regarding slavery.
   
   Then, brief biographical sketches of both Taylor and Fillmore, giving the reader a sense of where they had come from and who they were when elected as President and Vice President.
   
   Taylor only served a year and a half until his untimely death. In that time, he actually developed a decent record, with one of the highlights being his effort to prevent civil war from breaking out in 1850. He worked publicly and behind the scenes to try to create a compromise over admission of free versus slave states and other intertwined issues. he showed steadiness and political courage in the process.
   
   After his death, Fillmore acceded to the presidency. This former Mayor of Buffalo also handled the threat of secession pretty well. While his position wasn't the same as Taylor's he continued the effort to work out a compromise. In the end, the Compromise of 1850 averted conflict and secession for another decade. Taylor and Fillmore appear to warrant some of the credit.
   
   The tale continues with coverage of the rest of his presidency, his being "dumped" by the party in 1852, his later run for that office as a "Know-Nothing," and the final years of his life.
   
   All in all, a nice volume. One clear index of the book's value. It sure changed my mind about two presidents and gave me a greater appreciation of their role in a turbulent time. Certainly, one would not rate them among the all-time greats. But they deserve better credit than what they have received.

No comments about George Washington: An Illustrated Biography.