2 comments about Cavalryman of the Lost Cause: A Biography of J. E. B. Stuart.

1. ...but, on the whole, it's a valuable addition to the history of the war. When I first saw this recently, my question was "Why"?...we already have at least three other major bios of JEB, all of them good. John Thomason's "Jeb Stuart" [1930] is, I think, the most positive, and the present offering the most negative. Burke Davis' "The Last Cavalier" [1957], and Emory Thomas' "Bold Dragoon" [1986] would be somewhere in between, and all four are well worth your time. The event in history that has caused more words to be written than any other is, certainly, the resurrection of Jesus Christ. What is #2? My vote would be for the American Civil War...new books almost daily...web sites by the score...our fascination is endless....
   
   ........and JEB Stuart remains one of the war's more fascinating characters. The man had FLASH...he had STYLE...but, he was brave, and he could sure fight. Mr. Wert gives us good descriptions of the man...he was loved by many, respected by most, but he was a darn tough man to work for [I would rather have ridden with Forrest]...a devoutly religious man, he could be more hateful and vindictive than a Christian should be. His lack of respect for Beverly Robertson has a sound basis, but Grumble Jones is a different matter. A shameless self promoter, he was still fearless in battle...his ride around McClellan and raid on Chambersburg are covered in superb detail, and fine operations they were, but part of it was always about JEB.
   
   JEB's most improbable friendship with Stonewall Jackson is well documented, as is his rather cool relationship with Longstreet [Mr. Wert has given us the most postitive bio of him], and his virtual reverence for Robert E. Lee...nothing unusual in that. Wade Hampton accused JEB of already starting his campaign for Governor of Virginia...there was mutual respect between them, but no friendship. JEB probably would have been Governor had he survived the war; Hampton was Governor and Senator, and ran SC for 30 years, but he had the advantage of massive wealth.
   
   Gettysburg.
   
   That's where all modern appraisals of Stuart eventually lead. Numerous studies have either blamed JEB for the loss of the war, or completely exonerated him. Mr. Wert does neither, and that's probably the proper path. If you're reading this, you already know the story...discretionary orders [that was Lee's fault]...discretion exceeded...125 useless wagons...8 days wasted...battle lost. JEB was trying to show off after his screw up led to Brandy Station. "Where's your mule"? Indeed. We do get a good picture of JEB's partial redemption on the retreat. And, something I've never read before...apparently after Gettysburg consideration was given to firing Stuart [no surprise there], and replacing him with John Bell Hood. I'm pretty sure I've read all the Hood and Stuart bios, plus "RE Lee" and "Lee's Lieutenants"...I've not seen that, and neither has my friend Sam Hood, but he's checking into it. General Hood had been Cavalry prior to the war, but he had been wounded at Gettysburg. He could have done the job [in fact, he was chosen chief Cavalry instructor at West Point in 1859, though, anticipating secession, he turned down the job], and he probably got along with others better than Stuart did.
   
   One thing will disturb some, especially Stuart's descendents...everybody knows that though JEB was devoted to his wife and family, he enjoyed the attention of pretty girls...no crime there. So do I. Mr. Wert implies that there was a lot more than harmless dancing, and innocent flirtation, going on, and names names...Laura Ratcliffe. Are the facts straight? Beats me, but, with as good a historian as Mr. Wert, probably.
   
   A couple of minor errors...Fitz Lee wasn't injured in a fall after Second Manassas, it was Robert E. JEB attended St. James Episcopal in Richmond, not St. Paul's...I admit he could he could have visited St. Paul's. St. Paul's is still on East Grace Street, right where it was then. St. James [which is correctly given as the site of JEB's funeral] moved to its present location on West Franklin Street in the early 20th. century. It's within a block of JEB's statue on Monument Avenue, and has a beautiful memorial window picturing JEB as a Teutonic Knight. JEB IV is a Vestryman. Both St. Paul's and St. James are great Churches. I digress...
   
   This book, like the subject of it, has both positive and negative aspects. In both cases, the good far exceeds the bad. Was Stuart the greatest Cavalry Officer? Maybe, but there was Forrest [and Joe Wheeler and William Clarke Quantrill]. Is this the greatest Stuart bio? I don't think do, but the margin is awful thin, and the competition very tough. It Mr. Wert a great historian, and writer? Darn right he is...well recommended.



2. The Army of Northern Virginia possessed more than its' share of large than life figures. Some of them have become American icons, while the balance is familiar to the Civil War community. Their images grace our artwork, books, and stamps or are the subject of movies.
   James Earl Brown Stuart is one of these larger than life figures. Commander of Lee's cavalry, Stuart trained and motive these men into a dominate force. He personally led them into numerous fights both large and small. At Antietam, his placement of guns on the army's left helped breakup Union attacks. At Chancellorsville, he shielded Jacksons march and on Jackson's being wounded, Stuart took command. His attack reunited the wings of the army giving Lee a unified line and contributing to Hooker's withdrawal. Stuart's decisions during the Gettysburg Campaign are debated to this day and contributed to Lee's army being defeated. During his life, the press lionized and vilified Stuart, depending on his latest action. He was a man of great contradictions. A very competent officer but ambitious to a fault. Considered fair, he was known to be a good hater. His ambitions and personal feelings about people overruled his good judgment at times. A religious man with strong family ties and a good marriage, he sought the company of young women and flirted with them. This caused limited problems in his marriage. JEB Stuart is a fascinating subject with an interesting complex life.
   Jeffery Wert is one of our better authors. He combines a very easy to read style with an in-depth knowledge of the subject. His biography of James Longstreet is consider one of the best on the man. Wert captures the complexities and contradictions that make up Stuart's personality. He has the background to understand and explain Stuart's contribution to the war. Wert is neither enamored with nor critical of Stuart. He presents both the good and bad points in a fair manner allowing the reader to judge. On questions of judgment, Wert presents the facts and shows us why Stuart may have done as he did. The results of Stuart's actions are presented fairly without excuses or accusations.
   This is an excellent book! It finds the balance between readability and scholarship. The result is an informative read that is fun too. In addition to a biography of Stuart, the reader gets a view of cavalry operations during the war. I am not a great reader of biographies. However, this is a military and personal history of a major player in the Army of Northern Virginia.

5 comments about Mein Kampf.

1. It was perfect. Even better condition than described. Came in timely fashion and CHEAP!!! thanks a ton!



2. I assigned myself this book to read because I am working on a degree in history, with the aim of teaching high school history. Now that I have finished, I'll never inflict this reading on my students. This is easily the most tedious, boring book I have ever read. I think that is partly why Hitler was able to get away with basically spelling out his plans years before he came to power, and people were still surprised when he did exactly what he said he would do. Also no one took him seriously, and were horrified when they found he actually believed all this drivel he wrote.
   Still, it is a very important book historically, because it announced his plans 15 years before he carried them out. World leaders who wondered what Hitler was about had only to pick up Mein Kampf. As I read this book, I noted the most glaring cases of anti-Jewish remarks, as well as Hitler's views on the rest of the world. Often, the two subjects are intertwined. The quotes you read below are just some of the worst examples; this book is packed with countless other lies against the Jews and other nations.
   
   GERMANY VS THE WORLD:
   P.134, "Unused soil exists for people with force to take it."
   P.138, "Don't let political boundaries obscure the boundaries of eternal justice." (Borders of other nations)
   P.139, "What (land) is refused by amicable methods, it is up to the fist to take."
   P.255, "No half-measures; gravest/most ruthless decisions to be made."
   P.398, "Victory lies eternally and exclusively in attack."
   P.455, "Terror is only broken by equal terror."
   P.610, "The aim of a German foreign policy of today must be the preparation for the reconquest of freedom for tomorrow."
   P.611, "For the oppressed territories are led back to the bosom of a common reich, not by flaming protests, but by a mighty sword."
   P.651, "The boundaries of 1914 mean nothing at all for the German future."
   P.651, "Only childish & naive minds think to correct Versailles by wheedling and begging."
   P.652, "We National Socialists must hold unflinchingly to our aim in foreign policy, namely, to secure for the German people the land & soil to which they are entitled on this Earth."
   P.654, "Germany will either be a world power or there will be no Germany."
   P.654, "If we speak of soil in Europe today, we have in mind only Russia and her border states."
   P.660, "Let no one argue that in concluding an alliance with Russia we need not immediately think of war; an alliance whose aim does not embrace a plan for war is senseless and useless."
   P.688, (conclusion) "A state which in this age of racial poisoning dedicates itself to the care of its best racial elements must someday become Lord of the Earth."
   
   
   HITLER'S VIEWS OF THE PEOPLE:
   P.107, "Broad masses can only be moved by power of speech."
   P.341, Calls voters "Bourgeois voting cattle."
   P.375, Refers to "Unshakable stupidity of the voting citizenry."
   P.465, "The NSDAP should not be the servant of the masses, but their master."
   P.577, "National Socialism must lay claim to the right to force its principles on the whole German nation."
   P.608, Calls people "Great stupid sheep's herd of patient lamb-like people."
   P.654, Refers to African nations as "Little ni***r nations."
   P.659, Openly says he appraises value of men on racial basis.
   
   ANTI-JEWISH REMARKS
   P.169, Refers to Jews as "Poisoners of people."
   P.206, "There is no making pacts with the Jews."
   P.232, Refers to Jews as "Great masters of the lie."
   P.244, Says Jews control the press.
   P.246, "A 30cm shell hisses louder than a thousand Jewish newspaper vipers, so let them hiss."
   P.255, "Clear away filth of civilization, ignoring screams."
   P.272, "Jews in the press promoted lies about Germany in WWI."
   P.308, "Once this book (Mein Kampf) is common property of the people, the Jewish menace may be considered broken."
   P.324, "The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew."
   P.351, "The Jew is the great master in lying, and lies & deceit are his weapons in struggle."
   P.453, "The first task is the elimination of the existing Jewish state."
   P.556, Accuses Jews of manipulating Northern & Southern Germans against each other in WWI.
   P.561, First uses the term "Jewish question."
   P.638, Refers to "Jewish plot to rule the world."
   P.651, "It is the inexorable Jew who struggles for domination over nations; no nation can remove this hand from its throat except by the sword, and such a process is and remains a bloody one."
   P.661,"(The Jew) goes his way, sneaking in among the nations from within; he fights with lies and slander, intensifying the struggle to the point of bloodily exterminating his hated foes."
   P.662, Says Jews are from Satan.
   P.679, "If at the beginning of the war (WWI) or during the war 12,000 or 15,000 of these Hebrew corruptors of the people had been held under poison gas, the sacrifice of millions at the front would not have been in vain."
   
   By now it should be crystal clear how evil this man was, and this book is. This book was dictated while Hitler was in prison in 1924, and published soon after. It would be nearly a decade before he gained power. You have to wonder why his opponents and other world leaders who read this book at the time did not take it more seriously, especially in the late 1930's leading up to war. It's all laid out here; his determination to dominate Europe, to ally with Russia and then betray her, his contempt for the common citizen, his lust to tear up the Versailles treaty, and his unending hatred of the Jews. He openly hints at his desire to destroy the Jewish people many times. These views are mixed in with endless, incomprehensible rambling that will put you to sleep faster than Nyquil. Still, we only have to read it; Hitler was notorious for putting his own generals to sleep with his hours-long tirades.
   In any case, at the end of the book I was left with a feeling of disbelief that the rest of the world had not seen it coming, with this material available for anyone to read. I know that hindsight is 20/20, but hopefully the next time we are confronted with this kind of insanity, we'll be a little more quick to recognize it.



3. Well in the first part of Mein Kampf Hitler wrote mostly in prison so some things may be hard to put in perspective. His ideas were of very high standards for the white man and preserving heritage. This is not a book that some might have you think will lead to coercive action. The life story is interesting and does show how one man can actually make a huge impact when acting on beliefs. Good book to read for any one. Might be an eye opener for some, antithetical to what they were taught growing up. One thing he is dead on about is the media so that assertion goes along way from his time! So read up don't get mad cause you might be a liberal or Zionist pro Jew anti gentile! Be proud of what you are no matter who you are and remember it is alright to think out side the socialized illicit receptacle.



4. Mein Kampf from a history lovers point of view, is a great read. However, if your not a fan of the history subject you may find this book to be increadibly boring, a continuous flow of long words and sentences before our time. Understanding the complete facts about the second World War, is to understand both sides. If you only keep yourself to a one sided story, your no better than any of those critics or movie makers that produce films that slander our country. Such as Ferinhight 9/11. Excuse my spelling as I'm sure I mis-spelled quite a few words in this writing. If you plan on reading this book, understand what your getting yourself into. Yes, you may find some chapters to be increadibly obscene and stupid. Yes, I had to force myself through a couple of chapters. But, I promiss if you read this book, it may very well bring you to a better understanding of what was happening politicly and personaly to the people of Germany the few years before the second World War. All in All. I felt it was a good read. Do I believe everything and agree with him on everything he has to say???.......No.....



5. [...]
   
   What I read so far is fascinating so I guess I'll have to order another version of this book so I can finish reading it.
   
   Updated 8/30/08
   ----------------
   The [...] symbol above indicates where the editors removed part of my original review. They apparently didn't like exactly the way I said something (about the real source of the paper).
   
   My point was that this book is printed on very thin paper and with low quality ink. Also the type is small. All of these factors combined made it basically impossible to read in all but ideal lighting conditions which is no good for me since I bring my books into restaurants and other places to read them.
   
   At least the copy I purchased was. Maybe I got a bad copy I don't know.
   
   I'm still reading Mein Kampf but from a different publisher where the print quality is better. I'm finding it fascinating for just the historical information alone.
   
   Plus when it was written Hitler had not yet become the famous megalomaniac we all know about today. At the time of writing he was in prison with his buddy Hess after their failed attempt to overthrow the German government.
   
   Jeff Marzano
   
   The Mind of Adolf Hitler the Secret Wartime Report
   
   The Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956
   
   First Circle
   
   Clint Eastwood Collection: Where Eagles Dare

5 comments about Black Edelweiss: A Memoir of Combat and Conscience by a Soldier of the Waffen-SS.

1. Most of us of a "certain age" have read at least a few major histories of World War II or about the Third Reich that would more properly be considered overviews. I have certainly read my share and more. Black Edelweiss is a more personal tale which takes the reader into the author's Waffen-SS unit and is written in such a way that one can imagine himself part of the scene.
   Black Edelweiss is a gripping tale of obscure battles fought both in the remote backwaters of Finland and Karelia but also on the Western Front as Allied forces overwhelmed Germany. It is a tale of courage, idealism, loyalty, betrayal, and often super-human endurance. It is also the tale of one man's journey from being an idealistic recruit in the elite forces of his homeland to POW status where he is confronted with the reality of the enormity of his country's crimes.
   Author Johann Voss intersperses stories of his service and his subsequent captivity with more personal stories of his family and his social milieu in such a way so that anyone who has ever served his country can identify with him on a basic human level. As for his membership in the SS, most fair-minded people understand that most members of that organization joined for the prestige of serving their country in an elite unit, not to commit war crimes.
   Those hungry for the gritty details of history will be most satisfied after reading Black Edelweiss. It is an important addition to the edifice of our knowledge about World War II.



2. The withdrawal of German SS troops from Finland to Denmark, when the Finns ended their resistance to Soviet pressure, is fairly well known. The impossibly short timetable the Germans were given to withdraw, Finnish attacks on withdrawing German forces, and the long retreat to northern Norway are not so well known. The author describes "his" campaign from the viewpoint of a well-trained, highly-motivated, teenage soldier who walked and fought all the way as a member of an SS mountain division. Later, as a prisoner of war, he was never identified as a member of, and so escaped the harsh treatment reserved for, the Waffen SS. Surprisingly, he became a clerk for an American war crimes tribunal member at Nuremberg. The author examines in this book the question of Waffen-SS war-crimes guilt, and so, justifiably from his position of relative innocence, joins an emerging genre that seems to attempt to rehabilitate the Waffen SS. Interestingly, he pursued a career at law, post war. This book suggests a separate legal and moral niche for the Waffen SS who were indeed "just soldiers, too", which, at Nuremberg, was judged not to be the case.



3. The author tells a rather disappointing story abouth when he was a humble and simplistic soldier, proud of the "good branch of SS", despite hiding it during captivity for obvious reasons and ignoring his father's advice not to join the SS for the "things they are doing here". Another German soldier that "didn't know anything"... Impressive is that the author insisted that war was "Europe fighting against bolshevism", ignoring all the nations invaded by Germany and validating that thought with the fact that non-Germans from invaded countries were joining SS for obscure reasons...



4. This book is the memoir of a young German who in 1943 at the age of seventeen volunteered for the "Waffen-SS" (the military SS which was distinct from the political SS that ran the concentration camps) and subsequently served in the SS Mountain Infantry Regiment 11. He saw combat first at the Karelian front in Northern Finland against Soviet Russia and later at the Western front against the Americans and their allies. The memoir is the honest and accurate account of a brave soldier who sincerely albeit erroneously believed that he was fighting for a just and noble cause. It deals as much with the struggle between opposing armies which took place on the battle field as with the struggle between supposed duty and nagging doubt which took place in the author's mind.
   
   I can attest to the honesty and accuracy of the author's account because I too was a German soldier and had similar experiences which I reported in my book "A Mind in Prison" (Potomac Books, Washington D.C., 2000). I also fought in Finland though not in Karelia but north of it directly at the Arctic Ocean. Having been equally inexperienced and idealistic as the author of "Black Edelweiss," I volunteered for military service in 1939 at the age of eighteen and went through the same struggle of the mind between supposed duty and doubt.
   
   While reading "Black Edelweiss" I sometimes had the feeling that the author described my own experience. It was the same enemy, the same fight, the same landscape, the same cold, the same makeshift bunkers, the same insufficient rations, the same exhaustion, the same endless winter-night, and the same northern lights. Maybe the author experienced even harder fighting than I did, because the Waffen-SS was an elite corps which was always deployed where the fighting was the hardest. Nevertheless, I know how it was, and I have no doubt that the author is telling the truth.
   
   When Finland surrendered in September 1944, the German troops in Finland began a long retreat to Norway, avoiding neutral Sweden. The author's SS-unit marched from the area East of Rovaniemy (the capital of Lapland) to the area of Tromsoe in Northern Norway and from there to a sea-port where they could embark on a troop transporter to Germany where they were urgently needed. My military unit took the northernmost route from Kirkenes to Hammerfest where we embarked on a troop transporter which took us to Narvik. Both operations
   were exceedingly exhausting marches through the Artic night.
   
   Whereas my unit remained in Narvik till the end of the war, the author's unit was moved to the Western front which in early 1945 was already within Germany's borders. There they offered the last resistance to an enemy which was far superior in terms of numbers and material. They fought as bravely as usual but after heavy losses finally surrendered, landing the author in an American prisoner of war camp.
   
   The book is well written and documented with rare photos from the war in the Arctic. Since the author wrote his book immediately after the war while still being a prisoner of war, while I wrote my book more than fifty years later, the author does not completely come to terms with his fight for a criminal regime and with the hardships of a prisoner of war stemming from the collective accusations against the SS as a whole, whereas I had the advantage of having gained a soothing distance from the tragedy of WWII. But this difference diminishes neither his book nor mine. Each in its own way is a testimony before the court of history about brave young men who thought that they were doing their patriotic duty while in reality they were serving evil. The reader be the judge.



5. This book is excellent and far better than The Forgotten Soldier. The account is believable and in great detail, written sooner by the author than most memoirs are.

5 comments about Maid of Heaven: The Story of Saint Joan of Arc.

1. Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/RNE87Q7CFIJMO Great inspiring video about Joan of Arc with historic pictures.



2. Maid of Heaven was the third book I recently read about Joan of Arc. While I don't typically read poetry (that is I may be a bad judge), this particular poetry was definitely not to my liking. The book was essentially a short biography of Joan 's life told in a manner that seemed forced and not particularly appealing; the poetry aspects seemed almost non-existent to me other the some basic rhyming (I have read some really good poetry, some that captures your imagination and lets your drift into deep thought, not this one). The reason to add this review was to provide some counter-balance the 10 other 5 star ratings (!?) -- you may love this, but the book didn't excite my imagination at all.



3. Everyone knows of the general legend of Joan of Arc - a young and illiterate girl hears voices from God and leads France against the invading English. "Maid of Heaven: The Story of Saint Joan of Arc", however, tells the complete and through story of a sixteen year old girl who rose up to stand against insurmountable odds. Nonfiction, but written and reads like fiction, "Maid of Heaven: The Story of Saint Joan of Arc" is expertly composed and highly recommended to world history shelves and for anyone who wants a complete understanding of this enigmatic teenage girl who was anything but.



4. The symbolism in this poem is awesome! The whole battle of light verses darkness in the life of St. Joan is beautifully portrayed throughout Maid of Heaven. The very first stanza references St. Joan's birth on the Epiphany and from there her great spiritual journey unfolds in a way that make it clear what the focus of her life was: serving God.
   
   If you only read this poem as a history of Joan of Arc you will come away with a good understanding of the major events in her life. BUT if you allow the poem to take you deeper you will transcend beyond the obvious conclusions about St. Joan of Arc and better understand why she truly deserves to be called a saint.



5. I've read many books about France's Partron Saint, Joan of Arc, but never seen one like 'Maid of Heaven' by Ben Kennedy. It is Joan's life portrayed through beautiful poetic form. Mr. Kennedy does an amazing job of putting such a lyrical story into capitivating lyrical form. It is the kind of book that catches your attentiion, and then never lets go. Once I started, I was compelled to continue to the very end. The poetry is lovely and well versed, and the historical perspecties reflect an accurate accounting of Joan's amazing story. Most importantly, Mr. Kennedy doesn't neglect to include the spiritaul perspectives and implications in his work, and we are all the better for it. I highly recommend this lovely and most original approach to Joan's life.

5 comments about House to House.

1. Item was shipped in a timely fashion and was as originally described. Great seller!



2. This book was suggested to me by the mother of a Marine. I was going to say ex-Marine but there is no such thing. She said it was as close to the real thing as you could get. Her son was in Iraq three times but I don't think he told her the real thing. This book is good and it has it's moments. Enough so that I wouldn't want to trade places with any of these American hero's. I haven't finished the book yet but it tracks with my worst imaginings of what Iraq must be like. God bless our armed forces!
   John



3. After trying to understand for years even a small fraction of what is actually going on in Iraq and what happened in Fallujah, this book is a blessing. Not only is a it a great account to the things we all must know before we turn on CNN for the guide to our lives, it's also a great story in general.. It will steal you heart, if you have one. It's very easy to read and holds your attention throughout the whole book without any long boring gaps. So for those of you with limited attention span (like me), reading it should not take long or pose any problems.
   
   This book may also help you question and find out things about your own self. I hope it can do for many what it did for me. I felt more emotion that I have felt from any movie or book for many many years.
   
   I would like to thank SSG David Bellavia for doing the incredible things that you did and writing to tell us about it without holding back what most people would never share. You are and all of the men and women you served with are now more than ever my heroes! God bless you!



4. I loved this book and couldn't put it down. I read it on the Kindle. Life took a backseat while I read it.
   
   Fallujah now I know better than I ever thought I'd know it.
   
   I laughed, too. The description of the Iraqi soldiers dancing together a la Shakira is hilarious. The description of war is immediate and pressing it truly is as if the reader participates in the hell of combat, where human will often decides who wins and loses.
   
   There's a scene reminiscent of the brutal "Saving Private Ryan" scene where the fighting literally become tooth, claw, and knife.
   
   War truly is hell, and this book shows that soldiers die for each other out of love. Not for the big, noble causes, but to be there for his comrade.
   
   This book is similar to Black Hawk Down and almost as good.
   
   The only bone of contention I have is, as an English teacher, the spelling of "all right" not acceptable as "alright." It makes my skin crawl.
   
   I hope Americans realize he tremendous sacrifices that soldiers and Marines have made in the Iraqi and Afghani campaigns. This book is so effective for being so evocative and as a labor of love. David Bellavia is so effective for writing from the heart, laying it all bare.
   
   Great job, Sarge. Thanks for your service. Hoo-yah!



5. This is worth every minute of reading time. I read it through without stopping, it was so compelling and real. Thanks for the snapshot of that world, and for your service, Sargeant.

5 comments about Medal of Honor: Portraits of Valor Beyond the Call of Duty.

1. The book is an outstanding product and the service was beyond reproach.
   
   Thank you.



2. Great book, and a constant reminder of the simple fact that Freedom is not now, nor has it ever been free.
   It is won and vigilantly maintained by those who, through incredible struggle and sometimes seemingly insurmountable odds, persevere and simply never, ever, ever, give up.
   
   This book is about these brave souls, who, when faced with
   terror, looked it squarely in the eye and became the stuff of legends.
   
   I read one story per day, and it gives me all the perspective I need to "earn" my day and appreciate the fact that because of men and women like those portrayed here, I am an American and free.
   
   Doug Moore - Cardiff by the Sea, CA



3. Great coffee table book. Old soldiers and patriots can`t resist picking it up and reading. If you`re either of the above, you`ll have tears in your eyes. Difficult to put down. Will cause you to pause and reflect........and be thankful for those who gave their all and for those who by the grace of God lived to tell the story.



4. It is rare that a book can actually convey the power and emotion conveyed in this book. I was fortunate enough to meet one of the men featured in this book, and it was an experience that I will never forget.
   The book is well written and it is easy to find an entry if you are looking for something specific.



5. i heard col. jack jacobs discussing this book on imus about 2 years ago and immediately wanted it, but couldn't justify paying the initial price. last year, i saw a copy in the bargain rack at a large retail bookstore and snapped it up.
   
   of all the books i have regarding Medal of Honor recipients, this is the most impressive. no, it does not cover every recipient ... mainly because it focuses on those who were still alive at the time the book was being written (although several men had passed away before final publishing).
   
   the presentation of these men is somber and most importantly, honorable ... not a cheap over-the-top glorification. ordinary men and average citizens who thought of others before themselves. the photography is beautiful, the passages are well-written ... an tasteful and artful presentation that i am proud to own.

5 comments about Eisenhower: Soldier and President (The Renowned One-Volume Life).

1. Ambrose's 'Eisenhower' is a very popular book, if the reviews here are anything to do by. I would seem to be a lone voice of dissent, in that I was not impressed by this tome. Oh, it's not a bad *book* - Ambrose writes well and vividly - it's just a bad BIOGRAPHY. Ambrose himself admits in the first couple of pages that he has immense respect for Ike as a great and good man. Oh dear. That is *never* a good start, to admit that you have strong feelings for your biographic subject one way or the other. What follows is little more than a polished and well-constructed whitewash. Eisenhower's not particularly glorious record as Allied Supreme Commander is transformed into a near-triumph. His poor grasp of tactics (allied to an over-focus on grand strategy), his unbelievably stupid decision to let the Russians beat the US-UK forces to Berlin, and his grave weakness as regards tolerating the idiocy and arrogance of his colleages (Patton, Montgomery) do not seem to matter much to Ambrose.
   
   When we move on to his time as President, things settle down to this chronically slanted norm. With almost the sole exception of his two undisputed triumphs - his ending of the Korean War and his unflinching opposition to the UK-French-Israeli aggression against Egypt three years later - the whitewash brush gets a workout. Ike's mistakes were almost always the fault of others, "it was a different time" (tell that to the survivors of Treblinka, Steve; see what they say back), moral cowardice and inertia is a strength etc. The almost amusingly cynical way Ike was put up as a candidate by the Republicans like some sort of medal-strewn tailors' dummy - with the odious Dick Nixon there in the background to make sure the not overly bright old soldier stayed on-message - is sidelined and barely dealt with. Ambrose agonises over how to present Ike's appalling cowardice on 'too hard' (for him) moral issues - his fence sitting as regards Joe McCarthy's repulsive witch-hunting, and the festering sore of civil rights - as some kind of "he was too nice" virtue. Doesn't fly with me, and I'm amazed it did with others. Where we get into true Whitewash Country is earlier, in the truly pathetic downplaying of Eisenhower's notorious affair with his wartime secretary. We are told that nothing happened, even though everyone and and his dog knows very well that things most certainly did. Ambrose then back-pedals, and admits the affair he claims never happened *did* happen...but it wasn't *actually* an affair, because the one time the secretary and Ike tried to make love he couldn't raise the flag, so to speak. Riiiight. I'm sure Mamie would have appreciated this sterling demonstration of his complete fidelity towards her. My point is not in truth any sort of sniffy outrage at Ike repeatedly cheating on his wife with another woman, but rather amazement at how Ambrose simply refuses to allow *the truth* to get in the way of elevating the man to demi-godhood.
   
   Part of Ambrose's intent in this book is to combat the popular image of Ike as an icon of stagnation in 50s America. The writer succeeds admirably in proving what is surely Ike's best legacy...he presided over a time of massive economic prosperity in America and, for the times, relative military stability. Other than that, this book is a one-note, biased, hagiographic lovesong to a man who had many fine qualities but was flawed as any other of his fellow mortals. You won't see many of those flaws in this book, which renders Dwight D. Eisenhower a disservice. The man himself knew his limitations, the mark of a wise person, but Ambrose refuses to admit that most of those flaws and limits even existed.



2. This is a great biography on an underrated president, and a very easy read. Ambrose is wonderful in being able to pick out the key incidents and describe the Ike's policies without delving into the everyday details that bog down Robert Caro's biographies. Also, while Ambrose doesn't hide his admiration for Ike, he does reflect critically upon his subject, particularly his slow reaction to civil rights and McCarthy, and his inability to stem the arms race.
   
   Part of Ike's genius was projecting a reassuring calm, while acting to keep all of his options open. For example, he never ruled out using atomic weapons against China in the Korean War or Quemoy Island dispute, but because he kept this option open the Chinese backed down. He was tough, but always left a way out for opponents to back down and save face. Some have wondered whether he truly ranks as a great president because he had no major crisis to face, but I believe Ambrose is right when he says preventing war and managing crises well is perhaps an even greater achievement. I have read many presidential biographies, but have rarely felt that any other president matches the maturity and self-confidence of Ike (George H.W. Bush is another president I think had Ike's maturity in managing the presidency). The difference between Ike in Ambrose's book and the childish pronouncements and discussions of the current Bush administration is startling.
   
   Having said that, I would have been interested in a bit of a longer biography, particularly more details on Ike's use of the CIA in Iran (very relevant today). This has been a very controversial aspect of his presidency and seems somewhat out of character for someone who opposed Israel and Britain during the Suez Canal crisis. Also, we get very little of the cabinet, perhaps because Ike relied on them less than other presidents did - even John Foster Dulles is discussed only where necessary. Ike seems to largely have used his cabinet to give him information, not make decisions. (can you imagine a book about Johnson without a central role for McNamara or Nixon without Kissinger?)
   
   Overall, this is a great book, and will hopeful get more Americans to ponder the presidency and whom we want to sit in the Oval Office.



3. This is a very good biography of one of our greatest generals and our 34th president. It begins with Dwight Eisenhower's upbringing in turn-of-the-century Kansas. Ike attended West Point, but did not see combat in World War I. His commanding officers in the Army during the interwar years saw that he had great talent, and Eisenhower was ultimately given command of the Allied forces in World War II. The sense of confidence and optimism that Ike was able to engender in those he commanded helped make D-Day a success.
   
   After the war, he became president of Columbia University. He was elected president in 1952, and gained an armistice in the Korean War six months after he took office. While he was in the White House, Ike presided over many years of peace and prosperity, maintaining a growing economy while avoiding budget deficits and inflation. He instituted the Interstate Highway System, but did not act as strongly as he could have on civil rights. Ambrose believed that Eisenhower's caution was an asset in foreign policy but was problematic for his domestic policy.
   
   The book relates that after he left the presidency, Eisenhower was hawkish on Vietnam and advised LBJ to be more aggressive in his attempts to win the war.
   
   Ambrose made no secret of the fact that he was an Eisenhower admirer, but managed to cover pretty fairly both the strengths and weaknesses of Ike's service as general and president. Americans should be grateful for Eisenhower's hand in ending the sinister Nazi regime and for keeping America safe and prosperous during a decade, the Fifties, that was far more dangerous than most members of Generations X and Y realize.



4. Unless John McCain wins in November, it will be too long before we have our next military hero turned president. They used to all be this way, especially following the Civil War---Democrat and Republican.
   
   Not sure about those reviewers who deemed this a hagiogrpahy or the writing "pedestrian"; the book is thorough, balanced and erudite. I commend the late Mr. Ambrose for such a wonderful portrait of one of America's great leaders in the two most important places: the battlefields and the Oval Office. They surely don't make 'em like Ike anymore (Barack H. Obama?).
   
   The book is long but not exhaustingly long, goes through his humble heartland childhood, early military life, wartime commands, presidency and beyond. Ambrose looks deep into Ike with letters and meetings never read or seen before. What more can one ask for, especially for me as a military historian? Even the descriptions of battles in WW2 are dead on.
   
   I also admire Ambrose for dedicating this book "TO THE MEN OF D-DAY." Again, if even a professor alive today could scribe so eloquently, these losers would be more likely to dedicate a book to Malcolm X or some Hollywood leftist who fought for "the rights of the oppressed." No respect for America or the military, but I digress...
   
   Read the book. It's objective, analytical and important. I will pass it on to my friends and family, so they can better understand our world and thus make the correct judgments and decisions down the road.
   
   Some Americans like to forget history. Shame on them. As Peggy Noonan said of Sen. Obama recently:
   
   America is Mr. Obama's problem. He has been tagged as a snooty lefty, as the glamorous, ambivalent candidate from Men's Vogue, the candidate who loves America because of the great progress it has made in terms of racial fairness. Fine, good. But has he ever gotten misty-eyed over . . . the Wright Brothers and what kind of country allowed them to go off on their own and change everything? How about D-Day, or George Washington, or Henry Ford, or the losers and brigands who flocked to Sutter's Mill, who pushed their way west because there was gold in them thar hills? There's gold in that history.



5. Informative and easy to read.
   He looks at the subject from many angles and delivers a complete picture of the realities in IKE's world. I personally learned a lot not only about Eisenhower but about WWII, about the times at which he served and about the Cold War. A great book.

5 comments about Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War.

1. Great book - Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War
   if you like history!!! I was a member of the Officers Club that Boyd and his team met at. I never got to meet this genius - wish I had. The book is great and I have bought other books about Boyd's theories.



2. I had never heard of John Boyd, but I had read Coram's other excellent work about George "Bud" Day, so I decided to give this one a try as well. After reading both of these books, I would have to say that Coram ranks among the very top of military historians I have read. His books are well researched with hundreds of hours of personal interviews that clearly show through in the stories he presents.
   
   The idea that a USAF fighter pilot ("excuse me, but I'm just a dumb fighter pilot") can change the way our military wages war is pretty far fetched indeed. But it happened. Boyd was brilliant- loud, brash, opinionated, extremely well read, but brilliant.
   
   From his childhood in Erie Pennsylvania to his service in World War II, Korea, USAF Weapons School, Southeast Asia and finally in the Pentagon, Boyd knew how to make enemies. Coram paints a very balanced, thoughtful and insightful picture of John Boyd, his life and the times. And in the process, he brings real insights to the Pentagon, the top brass in each of the US Armed Forces. Nothing and no one is spared.
   
   It's often said that "At the Pentagon, Colonels are emptying the trash cans." That would be over-simplifying things a bit, but the idea that someone of his lowly stature would have the ear of two Secretaries of Defense (SecDefs), Chiefs of Staff and other top brass speaks volumes to his influence. But that the Commandant of the Marine Corps was a huge fan of a former USAF fighter pilot is nothing short of amazing.
   
   Ever wondered who came up with the famous "feint" and left hook attributed to "Stormin' Norman" Schwartzkopff? John Boyd, that's who, a lowly retired USAF Colonel who had the ear of Secretary of Defense Dick Cheyney.
   
   If you find the works of Von Clausawitz and Sun Tsu of interest, get this book. Exhaustingly researched and very well written.



3. Boyd, a rough-cut diamond developed fighter jet theories and stuck to his guns with the hide-bound Pentagon brass. We would all be richer if more military officers quit saying "yes sir" and used their minds to act like Boyd did.Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War



4. If you want to change the world for the better or just keep your little corner of it from getting worse, then you'll want to read this book. It's not just about "the art of war," as the subtitle claims. It's what Boyd discovered about how conflicts are fought and won. Sadly, although he flew in two wars, most of Boyd's clashes were fought within our own military rather than with some foreign foe. As a result, one of the best USAF fighter pilots who ever lived is better remembered by the Marine Corps, where he is a hero, than by his own branch.
   
   I'm not going spend time praising Boyd. The fact that I finished this book with a list of books and articles to read is praise enough. Instead, I'm going to offer a useful corrective to Boyd the man, by introducing someone else you should read.
   
   That someone is G. K. Chesterton, an Englishman with a maverick, warrior personality every bit as fierce and unyielding as Boyd's. On June 1, 1941, on one of the darkest days in World War II, when the island of Crete had fallen to the Germans, leaving 17,000 British soldiers as prisoners of war, the Times of London, defiantly put these lines from Chesterton's "The Ballad of the White Horse" on its front page:
   
   I tell you naught for your comfort,
   Yea naught for your desire,
   Save that the sky grows darker yet
   And the sea rises higher.
   
   Like Boyd, Chesterton understood that how we fight determines if we win or lose. He shared Boyd's contempt for those who believe that bigger is better. In a 1909 at the height of England's fears about new German battleships, Chesterton wrote precisely what Boyd would later say about fighter aircraft.
   
   "Common-sense tells a man that indefinite development in one direction must in practice over-reach itself... If you perceive your enemy plunging on blindly in a particular direction, the real thing to do, if you have any spirit and invention, is to calculate the weakness in his course and advance yourself in some other direction. You ought to take advantage of his infatuation, not to imitate it; you ought to surprise his plan of campaign, not copy it laboriously. If he is building very big ships, the best thing you could do would probably be to build small ones; ships lighter, quicker, and more capable of navigating rivers."
   
   But Chesterton understood something that Boyd never learned, an aspect of warfare that's so often forgotten today that the very word for it seems quaint--chivalry. Perhaps his best explanation of chivalry came in a 1906 article explaining why the Europe of his day dominated the world. Again Chesterton described a concept dear to Boyd, the power that comes from an ability to think new thoughts and imagine new ways of acting.
   
   "The elements that make Europe upon the whole the most humanitarian civilisation are precisely the elements that make it upon the whole the strongest. For the power which makes a man able to entertain a good impulse is the same as that which enables him to make a good gun; it is imagination."
   
   Boyd thought like a fighter pilot. He would have us understand a man in order to destroy him, knowing that a foe who's blown out of the air will never trouble you again. As a writer, Chesterton had a different perspective. He believed that understanding leads to restraint, writing in that same article: "For if you do not understand a man you cannot crush him. And if you do understand him, very probably you will not."
   
   Chesterton saw conflict in broad terms. When he clashed with H. G. Wells over the latter's infatuation with a World State or with Bernard Shaw over pacifism, he took the time to understand what each was saying. His criticisms of the dangers and weakness of international institutions are among the best ever written. His description of the pacifist personality is so accurate that it applies with near perfection to today's pacifists. But having gotten into the mind of his opponent, he recognized in him a fellow human being. With few exceptions, he retained the respect and even friendship of his foes. Only when one crossed a critical line, demonstrating that without great pain he was beyond redemption, would Chesterton seek to crush him to prevent the evil he intended. What was for Boyd the rule, destroying anyone who disagree with him, was for Chesterton the rare exception. Boyd needs to be tempered with Chesterton
   
   In short, I'd suggest that, as you read what Boyd said about war and conflict, you also read what Chesterton wrote. You'll accomplish a lot more and suffer far less grief if you do. And as you might suspect, I wrote a book on that topic, a collection of Chesterton's best articles on war and peace paying particular attention to his warnings about Germany. And when the necessity arose, Chesterton could be as tough-minded as Boyd. Chesterton used all his powers as a writer to crush those ideas in the German mind that Nazism would later exploit.
   
   --Michael W. Perry, editor of Chesterton on War and Peace: Battling the Ideas and Movements that Led to Nazism and World War II



5. If you want to change the world for the better or just keep your little corner of it from getting worse, then you'll want to read this book. It's not just about "the art of war," as the subtitle claims. It's what Boyd discovered about how conflicts are fought and won. Sadly, although he flew in two wars, most of Boyd's clashes were fought within our own military rather than with some foreign foe. As a result, one of the best USAF fighter pilots who ever lived is better remembered by the Marine Corps, where he is a hero, than by his own branch.
   
   I'm not going spend time praising Boyd. The fact that I finished this book with a list of books and articles to read is praise enough. Instead, I'm going to offer a useful corrective to Boyd the man, by introducing someone else you should read.
   
   That someone is G. K. Chesterton, an Englishman with a maverick, warrior personality every bit as fierce and unyielding as Boyd's. On June 1, 1941, on one of the darkest days in World War II, when the island of Crete had fallen to the Germans, leaving 17,000 British soldiers as prisoners of war, the Times of London, defiantly put these lines from Chesterton's "The Ballad of the White Horse" on its front page:
   
   I tell you naught for your comfort,
   Yea naught for your desire,
   Save that the sky grows darker yet
   And the sea rises higher.
   
   Like Boyd, Chesterton understood that how we fight determines if we win or lose. He shared Boyd's contempt for those who believe that bigger is better. In a 1909 at the height of England's fears about new German battleships, Chesterton wrote precisely what Boyd would later say about fighter aircraft.
   
   "Common-sense tells a man that indefinite development in one direction must in practice over-reach itself... If you perceive your enemy plunging on blindly in a particular direction, the real thing to do, if you have any spirit and invention, is to calculate the weakness in his course and advance yourself in some other direction. You ought to take advantage of his infatuation, not to imitate it; you ought to surprise his plan of campaign, not copy it laboriously. If he is building very big ships, the best thing you could do would probably be to build small ones; ships lighter, quicker, and more capable of navigating rivers."
   
   But Chesterton understood something that Boyd never learned, an aspect of warfare that's so often forgotten today that the very word for it seems quaint--chivalry. Perhaps his best explanation of chivalry came in a 1906 article explaining why the Europe of his day dominated the world. Again Chesterton described a concept dear to Boyd, the power that comes from an ability to think new thoughts and imagine new ways of acting.
   
   "The elements that make Europe upon the whole the most humanitarian civilisation are precisely the elements that make it upon the whole the strongest. For the power which makes a man able to entertain a good impulse is the same as that which enables him to make a good gun; it is imagination."
   
   Boyd thought like a fighter pilot. He would have us understand a man in order to destroy him, knowing that a foe who's blown out of the air will never trouble you again. As a writer, Chesterton had a different perspective. He believed that understanding leads to restraint, writing in that same article: "For if you do not understand a man you cannot crush him. And if you do understand him, very probably you will not."
   
   Chesterton saw conflict in broad terms. When he clashed with H. G. Wells over the latter's infatuation with a World State or with Bernard Shaw over pacifism, he took the time to understand what each was saying. His criticisms of the dangers and weakness of international institutions are among the best ever written. His description of the pacifist personality is so accurate that it applies with near perfection to today's pacifists. But having gotten into the mind of his opponent, he recognized in him a fellow human being. With few exceptions, he retained the respect and even friendship of his foes. Only when one crossed a critical line, demonstrating that without great pain he was beyond redemption, would Chesterton seek to crush him to prevent the evil he intended. What was for Boyd the rule, destroying anyone who disagree with him, was for Chesterton the rare exception. Boyd needs to be tempered with Chesterton
   
   In short, I'd suggest that, as you read what Boyd said about war and conflict, you also read what Chesterton wrote. You'll accomplish a lot more and suffer far less grief if you do. And as you might suspect, I wrote a book on that topic, a collection of Chesterton's best articles on war and peace paying particular attention to his warnings about Germany. And when the necessity arose, Chesterton could be as tough-minded as Boyd. Chesterton used all his powers as a writer to crush those ideas in the German mind that Nazism would later exploit.
   
   --Michael W. Perry, editor of Chesterton on War and Peace: Battling the Ideas and Movements that Led to Nazism and World War II

3 comments about Arabian Knight: Colonel Bill Eddy USMC and the Rise of American Power in the Middle East.

1. An apt conjugation of author and subject makes for a revealing work on the bases for the United States' position in the Middle East. Lippman is a former Middle East bureau chief of the Washington Post and author of four books on the interrelated topics of the Arab world, Islam, and American foreign policy as well as a regular commentator on today's swirling, often violent and threatening developments in the Middle East. His subject of U. S. Marine Corps Colonel Bill Eddy was born in Lebanon, spoke fluent Arabic, fought in World War I, and was a noted scholar of English literature. During World War II, he served as a spymaster in North Africa in preparation for the Allied landings; a role which gave him position and influence in the formation of the CIA. From his incomparable experience and position, he facilitated the historic meeting of F.D.R. with Saudi Arabia's King Abdul Aziz in 1945. This meeting was a cornerstone for the wide-ranging developing and the complex current situation of the U.S. in the region.
   
   Eddy's unique blend of roots in the Arab world, talents and interests, and commitment to the United States made him invaluable in the critical circumstances and often deceptive appearances of the Middle East in the World War II era and its aftermath. After World War II, American foreign policy people and politicians focused on the Soviet Union and the related spread of Communism as the greatest threat. As early as 1947, however, Eddy advised that it was not the spread of Communism which should be the greatest concern in American relations in the Middle East, but the "rise of Islamic militancy." These are Lippman's words for elements Eddy identified in countries across the Middle East; which elements have come to be termed "Islamic fundamentalism" especially as manifest by jihadists. Believing Israel would be defeated by an alliance of Arab states, Eddy cautioned U.S. policymakers against a hard and fast identification with the fledgling Jewish state. While his belief that Israel would be militarily defeated was wrong, his broader views about the damage to the U.S. position and interests throughout the Middle East and emerging Islamic militancy were prescient.
   
   The early years of Eddy's adventurous career in World War I and spying for the North Africa invasion are covered dramatically and concretely. Most of the text though (about half) covers his more involved and delicate work in laying the grounds for the meetings of U.S. and Saudi Arabia heads of state and subsequent developments in other parts of the Middle East and ensuing American politics and diplomacy. Thus Lippmann's biography is of particular interest to today's readers. Eddy's activities are like a window onto the origins of U.S. relationships and policies throughout the Middle East, especially centered on Saudi Arabia and oil. And as such, the activities shed much light on how the U.S. position has become undermined and how policies have gone awry or become counterproductive.



2. As a former Eurocentric American, this book is a terrific introduction to what often seems our love/hate relationship with the Middle East. With striking, straight-forward prose, Thomas Lippman makes history a personal and urgent proposition for every reader. Lippman breathes life into this history through the compelling human story of Colonel Bill Eddy. As a reader, I particularly admire the portrayal of Eddy's vigorous and astute role in defining relationships with Saudi Arabia, and later, his work during the Truman administration to create a viable and autonomous intelligence community. With ARABIAN KNIGHT, Thomas Lippman truly delivers to the reader a remarkable story of an American writ large in the world.



3. At the beginning of "Arabian Knight" a State Department official is quoted as saying that "Bill Eddy was probably the nearest thing the United States had to a Lawrence of Arabia." I have never had a high opinion of T.E. Lawrence, based on his numerous self-promotional actions; his openly racist statements made in his "classic," - "Seven Pillars of Wisdom;" to his essential dishonesty, as confirmed by historians such as David Fromkin. Based on the excellent biography of Eddy by Lippman, I would consider such a comparison an insult to the memory of Eddy, who was the antithesis of so many of Lawrence's character flaws. The one characteristic they shared was an outsider's perspective on Saudi Arabia during its formative period.
   
   Bill Eddy was born in Sidon, Lebanon, in 1896, the son of missionary parents. He became fluent in the street Arabic patois of his childhood playmates. This was one talent that served him well throughout his life. Upon his death in 1962, he was buried in a cemetery in Sidon, and along with his family members, are the only non-Arabs buried there. Eddy's life was eventful, with several key junctures with critical points in American history.
   
   For the first 100 pages Lippman establishes Eddy's bona fides as the quintessential American patriot and man of action. Immediately after graduating from Princeton in 1917, he joined the Marine Corps, and saw action in the battles at Belleau Wood and the St. Mihiel salient, in France, in the First World War. Towards the very end of the war he was struck down by the Spanish influenza, which killed more people than all the casualties in the "Great War." As a result, he almost died in an American military hospital; he ultimately recovered, but walked with a limp for the rest of his life. After the war he spent some time at the newly founded American University in Cairo, but eventually accepted the position of president of Hobart College in New York State for family reasons. He spent much of the inter-war period there, but tired of managing academic squabbles, and returned to Cairo, in government service, just prior to WW II. As an intelligence officer he was soon posted to Tangiers, in Morocco, which Lippman says had much of the intrigue and duplicity that were depicted in the movie "Casablanca." The author states that based on Eddy's intelligence assessments, delivered personally to the Allied High Command, Operation "Torch", the invasion of North Africa in 1942, was given the go-ahead.
   
   The core of the book is the next 100 pages. While WW II still raged, the political leadership in Washington was formulating the structure of the post-war world. One component of this would be to recognize the importance of the Kingdom, as oil wealth would help transform it from one of the world's poorest countries. Eddy was sent to Jeddah in 1944, as a "Special Assistant" to the American resident. His Arabic language ability was an important component in establishing a good working relationship and friendship with King Abdul Aziz. But so to was a basic attitude of treating "the natives" in a manner of equality and respect, unlike numerous of his compatriots. Eddy was the sole interpreter, trusted by both parties, when President Roosevelt met King Abdul Aziz on the USS Quincy, on the Great Bitter Lake, in the very waning days of the war. Eddy was one of the most effective advocates of the mutual benefits of a strong American-Saudi relationship. He was again tapped to be the American who would establish diplomatic relationships with the most reclusive area of the Arabian Peninsula - the Yemen. In 1946 he went to San'a to meet Imam Yahya. It took him three weeks to cover the 100 miles from the coast by horseback.
   
   In the bibliography Lippman fittingly lists Dean Acheson's "Present at the Creation," an appropriate theme for Eddy's life. Not only was he a driving force behind the creation of a strong American - Saudi bilateral relationship, he was also a central force in the creation of the CIA from the components of the OSS, the organization he worked for during WW II. The later part of the book covers the bureaucratic fighting in Washington, which Eddy participated in, that established the CIA. Since Eddy preferred, and felt he was more effective, not working as a self-promoter, but as a man of reticence, it was difficult for Lippman to determine the full extent of Eddy's role in the overthrow of the democratic government of Syria. This coup, along with the CIA's overthrow of the democratic government of Iran, in 1953, could have been explored further by Lippman, to underscore the continued mistrust of the American government by the peoples of the Middle East, and why inquisitive Americans are often accused of being in the CIA.
   
   Eddy was also an advocate of the Arab point of view concerning the creation of the State of Israel. Lippman does an admirable job in negotiating this sensitive, emotional subject with as neutral a point of view as possible. I felt he failed only once, when he said: "The Arabs, by clinging to their absolutist position and refusing to yield any land to the Zionists, forfeited the political high ground, to their lasting detriment." (p228) Clearly they had already yielded much land, and had accepted substantial immigration; they simply did not want to become a minority in their own country - an issue on a far lesser scale that concerns Americans today about immigration into their own country. By in large, having lost this struggle for influence, Eddy and his family retreated to his origins - Lebanon, where he worked for Aramco, and almost certainly the CIA, to the end of his days.
   
   The book has a stellar graphic design, essential maps, numerous photos from Eddy's life and a solid bibliography. Lippman has done a wonderful service in writing an excellent biography on the life of one American who was deeply involved in numerous important events in American history - from the Western Front of WW I, to Operation Torch in WW II, to the establishment of the American - Saudi relationship as well as the creation of the CIA. It is an essential read for anyone exploring those "present at the creation" of the current world.

2 comments about Now the Drum of War: Walt Whitman and His Brothers in the Civil War.

1. Those of us that were born during or after World War II have a better understanding of the war than those who only read history of the war. Our history is a combination of personal experiences told by family members and our reading. This makes history a personal experience that makes us part of this great event. We have lived through the war from the stories of our families experiences and became part of those events.
   While none of us can hear personal experiences from family members about the Civil War, we can find books that tell the type of stories our families told about World War II. The experiences of those families can become part of our understanding of the war. These small family events become part of our story of the war and increase our understanding of the war. "Now the Drum of War", "The Fighting McCooks" and "House of Abraham" are excellent examples of family histories that illustrate the impact of the war on American families.
   This is a complex and layered book, which is more than I expected. This is a history of the Whitman family that is much more than just the Civil War. This is a history of one family trying to make a life in Brooklyn and Long Island before, during and after the war. While the Civil War is the pivotal event in their lives, it is not the centerpiece of the book. The book is more a biography of the Whitman family than a history of the Civil War. While the cover promises a history of the war, it is not the major focus of the book. Walt Whitman worked in the hospitals in Washington, his brother George served in a New York regiment and a third brother paid to escape the draft. The Whitman's were not unusual and their story is not unique. Walt and George contributed to but their brother out of the draft. George enlisted as a private and was promoted to company commander for bravery. Walt saved many lives through kindness in the hospitals. Each day, he came with money, fruit, candy, paper, pens and stamps. He gave these to the penitents, wrote letter for them, talked to them and sat holding their hands as they died. The brother who stayed home, helped support their Mother, sisters and brother who was dying. This is an intimate look at a family living through the war and trying to establish themselves in the middle class.
   The author writes well. He tells a story well and writes a good book. There is room for improvement but this is a solid readable account. The book will appeal to those who are interested in Walt Whitman, the Civil War and life in Brooklyn in the 19th century.



2. Do our kids learn anything about Walt Whitman in school these days? Do they read any of the work of our nation's greatest poet? Sadly, these are questions worth asking.
   
   A sizeable library of books on Whitman has accumulated since his death in 1892. He continues to provide grist for the lit-crit mills and the doctoral thesis industry. For those curious about Whitman's life or just enthralled by his wide-ranging poetic flights, there is a lot out there.
   
   Journalist, historian and fiction writer Robert Roper has taken a slightly different tack in NOW THE DRUM OF WAR. While concentrating on the poet's well-known service as a sort of unofficial visiting nurse in the military hospitals around Washington during the Civil War, he also places Whitman within his family situation --- his aging mother back in Brooklyn, his six siblings, his early careers as house builder and journalist, and his once glossed over but now openly acknowledged identity as an open homosexual.
   
   Roper's book is not a straightaway biography. It virtually ignores Whitman's childhood and devotes almost as much attention to his heroic soldier-brother George as it does to Walt himself. It is grounded largely in family letters, in Walt's own personal notebooks and in reminiscences of those who knew him both at home and in the military hospitals and camps. Roper sees him as "the war's most knowledgeable noncombatant."
   
   Walt Whitman initially went south to visit George after the bloody battle of Fredericksburg, just one of a long string of major battles in which George performed heroic service under hails of shot and shell, while sustaining only one relatively minor wound. Through acquaintances in Washington, Walt was able to find lodging and part-time government work that left him ample leisure to carry out his real mission of visiting the wounded laden with small articles, food items and words of comfort.
   
   Roper makes clear that Whitman also saw these injured young men as raw material for his poetry. He gives us a goodly amount of analysis of the poems, showing how many of them reflect places Whitman had seen and men Whitman came to know in his hospital rounds. The author is candid too about the obvious sexual attraction that Whitman felt toward many of the soldiers he comforted.
   
   His brother and his elderly mother were both uncomprehending of his poetic gifts, but both loved him and cared for him assiduously by letter. He was, says Roper, his family's father figure. George Whitman could not make heads or tails of LEAVES OF GRASS when that epoch-making collection of poems first appeared, and Mrs. Whitman compared her son's book ruefully with Longfellow --- well, if "Hiawatha" is poetry, I guess his is too.
   
   Roper's mining of family letters and journals gives us a good idea of what life was like both at home and in the army camps during the war. Typical of Roper's lack of interest in standard biographical detail is his dismissal in one sentence of the famous incident when a minor government official got Whitman fired from his Washington job after finding and perusing a copy of LEAVES OF GRASS in Walt's office desk.
   
   Roper's obvious interest in George also leads to a fair amount of discourse about Civil War battle strategies and campaign tactics. This is perhaps interesting up to a point, but it is easily available in quantity elsewhere and seems irrelevant to his book's main purpose. That complaint aside, NOW THE DRUM OF WAR provides a valuable portrait of Walt Whitman as both Civil War bard and family man. He was, as one hospital observer put it, "an odd-looking genius."
   
   Happily, Roper retains the picturesque odd spellings and halting grammar of his original sources. But oddly, the book has no table of contents, and his 29 chapters bear no titles --- merely numbers.
   
   --- Reviewed by Robert Finn