Kansas Books

Taaffe has not exactly broken a great deal of new scholarly ground with this book. However he has taken a well worn narrative path and made it seem new to me. Taaffe's analysis of the much analyzed command problems of the Army of the Potomac gives readers a new insight into the role of the Corps commanders in the intra-Army politics and tactical and strategic decision making process for the Army. Taaffe also shows their impact the political establishment in Washington and its continual search for a commander of the "Sword and Shield of Washington."
As expected McClellan gets his share of blame and also praise for the officers that were nurtured along during his tenure. Indeed many of them did not blossom at Divisional or Corps command until he was two years removed from the AoP.
And it is also not surprising that Grant's decision to accompany the Army helps its generals fight the bloody battles of 1864 and 1865 by providing a political buffer between the political leadership in Washington and the field army.
The narrative is crisp and well written and made this book an enjoyable read. While not the newest material under the sun, it certainly is a needed synthesis of the volumes of biographical and historical information about the leaders of the AoP.

This is a history not of a war or of an army but of a group of men that commanded an army and in doing so determined the course of a war. The 36 men who commanded a corps in the Army of the Potomac were a diverse lot who reached the summit of the most important Union army in the Civil War. Many people find it almost impossible to understand the hows and whys of their promotion to corps command or the impact these men had on the battles they fought. Mr. Taaffe simplifies a very complex subject while not shorting changing his readers. The book is organized not by people or by campaigns but by phases. Each phase, is a major step in the development of not the army but the group of men that commanded its' corps. This logical division helps the reader move through a very complex developing process with an immediate understanding of the overall process. The second contribution to the reader's understanding of the subject is the assignment of these men into the competing groups that fought for political control. The groupings are constant through the changing phases of the war and the shifts in power and prestige of a group make an interesting sub story.

As the war enters each phase and changing power of the groups, produces the current crop of candidates for promotion. This interaction and the resulting corps commanders are presented in a logical manner that might be Monday QB but is impressive and very understandable. Each man is given a short afterward, keeping them flesh and blood not just a blue suit with stars. I'm very fond of a short afterward and the author delivers a concise summary.

The strongest points of the book are the interaction of the commanders, the jockeying for command and the relief of General Warren. Each is well handled with the reasons for and effect on the army fully presented. This is a short book but packed with information and very readable. I think it is an important book that needs to be read by anyone wishing to understand the East.

"Running a war seems to consist in making plans and then ensuring that all those destined to carry it out don't quarrel with each other instead of the enemy." - Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke, Chief of the Imperial General Staff (1941-46)

Though Lord Alanbrooke's observation specifically concerned relations between the Western Allies fighting Germany in WWII, it could just as validly apply to the infighting that plagued the Army of the Potomac (AoP) otherwise battling for the Union in the eastern theater of the American Civil War. Before fulfilling its mission by defeating Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia in April, 1865, the AoP lost more confrontations than it won and sustained more casualties than it inflicted. No wonder, after the Battle of Cold Harbor, that the general commanding all Union armies, Ulysses Grant, asked, perhaps rhetorically, division commander Brigadier General James Wilson:

"Wilson, what is the matter with this army?"

Wilson's answer reportedly implicated a flawed organizational structure, defective communications, a confused chain of command, and an inferiority complex among the officers relative to Bobbie Lee. In any case, Stephen Taaffe's COMMANDING THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC is an engrossing and fascinating examination of the AoP's command structure, from McClellans's assumption of overall command in July 1861 to April 1865, as exemplified by those generals that held either corps and/or army command. Against a background of the AoP's major engagements, which are each summarized very briefly, Taaffe describes each general's ascent to power, whether it was through political connections, opportunism, merit, or ideological agreement with the current Army Commander - categories which, in some cases, overlapped. Conversely, the author also explains why each lost his position: killed or seriously wounded in battle, promotion, battlefield fatigue, alienation of superiors and/or bickering with peers, or quitting out of simple disgust. Indeed, only three of the AoP's thirty-six corps commanders lasted for more than a year.

The book includes a section of generals' formal photo portraits, which includes those of McDowell, Sumner, Heintzelman, Keyes, Burnside, Hooker, Meade, Porter, Franklin, Smith, Warren, Butterfield, Sickles, Birney, Pleasonton, Howard, Couch, Sedgwick, Slocum, Stoneman, Gibbon, Hancock, Humphreys, and Wright. Oddly, because I can't imagine that such don't exist, there are no photos of Wilcox, Williams, Sheridan, Sikes, Newton, Reynolds, French, Mansfield, Reno, Griffin, Cox, Hays, Pope, or Parke. Because of these omissions, I'm knocking off a star simply for the resultant lack of completeness to an otherwise excellent volume. The characters of the generals herein described comprise the core of the narrative, and this reader wanted to look them in the eye, so to speak.

As a bonus, or perhaps a distraction, the command structure of General Butler's Army of the James is also included from the time of the AoP's siege of Petersburg when the former force moved into close contact with the latter.

I heartily recommend COMMANDING THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC to any serious or casual student of the Civil War since it examines the dysfunctional AoP from a perspective different from the norm. Taaffe's main conclusion seems to be that the Army of the Potomac suffered from having to operate in such close proximity to the seat of Federal political power and authority in Washington, D.C., a handicap not borne by the more successful western armies, e.g. the consistently victorious Army of the Tennessee.

I liked this book by Taaffe. As the other reviewers have said, this is not original material. But heck, this is a 150 year old war. Taaffe thesis is that with all the manpower, materials, and numerical superiority, why did the Army of the Potamac take four years to destroy the Army of Northern Virginia. The issue was poor leadership. Taaffe looks at the army leaders, as well as the Corps commanders, and details their leadership pattern. Their early experience was awful. They wasted lives with poor strategy. The political generals were far worse. Yet they were needed too. Poltical interference clouded the judgement of some decisions. With time, the Army of the Potamac became more professional and competently led. That is when they started winning. An ugly win is still a win, and the Army of the Potamac beat Lee's Army.

This is a nice read for those interested in the Civil War. The book is divided into the chapters on each General commanding the Army of the Potomac.

I read Charlene Weir's first mystery featuring Susan Wren, Winter Widow, and was quite impressed. I was absolutely thrilled when I saw that the series had been continued. The latest istallment of Susan Wren, Edge of Midnight, was much different in tone and violence. I expected another Kansas Cozy, but the brutal rape and murder scene at the beginning of the novel was quite shocking. I wasn't expecting that. Also, as I continued reading the story of Cary Black, the abused wife, I kept thinking of the novel Sleeping with the Enemy by Nancy Price (the movie was based on this novel). In Sleeping with the Enemy, the run-away abused wife is quite similar to Cary. They both are extremely thin and don't eat much. Both wear a wig, and both settle in rural towns. But what really seemed too similar was the job that both protagonists took after coming to their new towns. In Sleeping with The Enemy, the abused wife took a job taking care of a paralyzed former professor. The professor had a teenage girl helping out who was always running to class, etc. In Edge of Midnight, Cary took a job as companion to a partially paralyzed stroke victim who was a psychiatrist. Her granddaughter needed the help and was always running off to class. On the flip side, the two characters have many different characteristics. Of course, I realize there are only so many plot variations, but the novel is not what most people remember about Sleeping with the Enemy, but the movie, which is very different. Read Sleeping with the Enemy and see the similarites. Cary was however a very sympathetic character, and the novel was her story. I would like to read a book about what becomes of her. Susan Weir was on the sidelines. I will go back and read some of the books that came between these two novels, because I believe I missed a shift in tone somewhere along the way. Overall, I was a little disappointed in this novel. Charlene Weir did bring all of her plot lines together; however, in today's modern mysteries, beware of being someone's helpful, best friend.

i do agre with many of the reviews on here pertaing to this particular offering But, I will buy or borrow Ms. weirs next book anyway . It's not unusual to hva e novel with high expectations and the author i'm sure would love to oblige ..however, this one is a bit too much a mix up .

I love her first book " A Cold Christmas " and found it at a yard sale ...still has a place on my bookshelves . Ms. Weir has a bright and long future in this genre as good as any of mary higgins clark or her daughter's , Carol . and yes, I have read every one of mis Weirs other books . Not all consistant but, perhaps time and practice will be a help .
I think she's worth the look .

Police chief Susan Wren is very busy in the small town of Hempstead, Kansas. She has a rookie cop who has nearly killed two of her partners by not following their instructions. The teenaged girl Susan has befriended is clearly upset but won't talk to Susan. A World War II veteran suffering of Alzheimer get a hold of a gun. Into this comes Cary Black, a woman on the run from her abusive husband, who is a cop.

I so enjoy this series and felt the last book, "Up In Smoke," was excellent. For me, this book wasn't up to the same level. There was a lot going on in this book, perhaps a bit too much. I did feel the story could have been much tighter. And yet, Ms. Weir deftly wove most the fragments together into a suspenseful plot primarily focused on abuse. The protagonist of this book, rather than being Susan, was Cary. Ms. Wren did a very good job of showing the balance of Cary's fear yet strength and determination, as well as the husband's psychosis and rationale for beating his wife. However, there were a few too many coincidences and I definitely saw the end coming. This was definitely not her best book. I do recommend Ms. Weir's books and wish she would write them faster, rather than every two-to-three years, but I should recommend starting with "Winter Widow."

In Hampstead, Kansas, Police Chief Susan Wren, battling the flu, reads the riot act to new cop Ida Rather, who disobeyed a direct order and almost seriously injured another police officer. At about the same time that Susan admonishes Ida, in El Cerrito, California attorney Arlette persuades battered Cary Black to flee her abusive spouse Mitch a cop, at a time when his professed beloved is going blind. Arlette arranges for Cary to hide in the home of a friend Kelby Oliver in Hampstead.

Upon arriving in Hampstead, Cary finds Kelby is missing. Fearing the beating of her life for running away, Cary moves into Kelby's home and begins to become the woman even obtaining work under her new identity as a caretaker for a stroke sufferer and gets a library card in order to borrow books. However, unbeknownst to Cary, Kelby is in hiding after death threats from thugs because of her position as she sits on a jury in which the prosecution seeks the death penalty for a brutal rape-murder. Soon everything will converge on the frightened rabbit who obviously picked the wrong identity to hide behind.

Two things freshen up the seventh Chief Wren tale: first she is not the prime player, but serves more in a support role and second Mitch's extreme behavior between abuse and love seems genuine. The story line is action-packed from the moment that Cary flees for the Plains only to jump "Out of the frying pan, into the fire". What is fascinatingly is that it is enthusiastic disobedient Ida rather than Susan who plays the prime investigative role. Charlene Weir keeps readers' attention as they wonder whether Mitch will get to Cary before the thugs get to her as Kelby.

Harriet Klausner

Hulsey manages to make a fascinating period of our history boring. His writing is plodding, and minor factual errors seem to have slipped through the editing process.

This is a great book by a highly skilled and discerning author. Hulsey definitely brings 20th Century American politics back to life!

Hulsey's analysis of the political culture in which Senator Everett Dirksen was both a major influence and eager participant is especially timely. Anyone interested in today's partisan climate (becoming more partisan with each pregnant chad) will enjoy reading about the politics of Dirksen's day. Hulsey argues convincingly that "supra-partisanship" allowed for the passage of major legislation, particularly in the area of civil rights, that would have been impossible without the real cooperation of both Republicans and Democrats. This is a very thoughtful look at American politics in the fifties and sixties and the engaging story of a senator whose main conviction was flexibility.

I was attracted to this book looking to expand my knowledge of a key historical figure, who three decades after he left the stage, is perhaps best recalled for the quote (perhaps apocryphal): "a billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon we're talking about real money."

Byron Hulsey's work is less a biography than a chronicle of Dirksen's long career in public life. Certainly, we are provided some basic details on his upbringing, personal life, and political campaigns. However, the overwhelming focus is on Senator Dirksen as a practitioner of "supra-partisan" politics, a term Hulsey coins to capture the period of political consensus and harmony that extended from the late 1950s through most of the 1960s. Hulsey depicts, time and again, how Dirksen, the Republican leader in the Senate, collaborated with the Democratic Kennedy and Johnson administrations to forge legislation and advance America's interests during the Cold War.

The election of Richard Nixon in 1968, Hulsey observes, ended the supra-partisan consensus, and ushered in a new period of acrimony and heated partisan division that continue to mark public life to this day. The ascension of a younger generation of legislators -- less deferential to the genteel traditions of the Senate -- and the aggressive Investigative Journalism ethic were contributing factors in the demise of supra-partisianship.

Fittingly, Hulsey observes, three major exponents of supra-partisanship passed from the public stage within a year of each other -- LBJ through retirement and Eisenhower and Dirksen through death.

This book opens a window on a bygone era, and will make for enjoyable reading for anyone interested in the workings of Washington, DC in the 1950s and 1960s.

Bruce Bair's characters rise no higher off the page than the print. Everyone he writes about, including himself, is less than 1/2 dimensional. Bair only manages a rare page or two of interesting writing as he describes some of the more grueling farm tasks, but these few pages are lost in the consistent undercurrent of rancor which evoked in the this reader a sad sense of embarrassment for the author and his unfortunate family.

Growing up on a working farm and being expected to work long hard hours at thankless and repetive tasks is typical of many family businesses, especially in that time and place. And the same can be said of growing up under a strap wielding dysfunctional parent in that time and place. But if Bair thinks he should stop what he is doing to write a book about such an untypical life I ask that he at least go a writerly step further by giving us one or two characters with whom we can identify or care for.

I had this book several years before I actually bothered to read it, and once I opened it up, I couldn't put it down. It was absolutely marvelous. I, too, am a farm boy who later became a journalist. While some of the choices he made were different than the ones I made, and many of the circumstances were different, I could really relate to this story. Actually, after reading this, it made me think that I ought to get off my buns and try to write a book.

Just to set the record straight, Bruce was not maligning either me or the way we met in any way in this book. Nor was he maligning his father, his family or anyone else. This is reality, folks. This is what it's like out here on the Great American Desert. This is what the term "hard life" means, not that it's a life without hope or love or beauty. This book is a tribute to the landscape of the plains and the way one farmer coped with that landscape and made it support him and three generations of his family. Bruce has heard from dozens of High Plains farmers who attest to the truth in his book. This is shared experience. I find it pathetic that the Kirkus reviewer has no respect for the audience this book appeals to. I'm sorry, you fancy-schmancy Back East high-falutin' prissy literary yahoos--but I'd give my eye-teeth to see you digging irrigation trenches in 112 degree heat sometime. Get real.

First things first. You'll simply have to disregard the Kirkus review of this book, because it's wide of the mark by several country miles. "Good Land" is not a book listing the grievances of a son against against a domineering father or that son's miserable childhood. It's about a family making the best of what they have to work with and facing the daily reality that working together under trying circumstances doesn't often bring about blissful harmony. It's a well-told, familiar tale to those who have lived it, and it is these people who will appreciate the honest look at the art of wrestling with the land and weather to make a living. It's as if the Kirkus reviewer holds the belief that farm families live an idyllic existence far from the cares of the city. Well, that has never been so, and never will be. Speaking from experience, I know that the working relationships of farming fathers and sons can be volatile. I also know that there is no fiercer love on earth.

Though I've never met Bruce Bair, I know him in the way all Kansas farm people know each other, whether they've stayed on or strayed from the farm. This book speaks to me like nothing else I've read lately. Since my father watched the births of three daughters and a stillborn son before he got his farmer, my sisters and I were proudly pressed into service. So I, too, have witnessed the wrench-throwing, stomping-mad tempers of a man pressed to the wall by ripening wheat, milo waiting to be planted, broken-down machinery, and cattle needing to be tended to. I know the eerie hypnotism of hour after hour alone on a tractor in the middle of a vast expanse of land, with only dust devils for company. The longing for an afternoon at the "pee-filled paradise" of the nearest public swimming pool, as the author so aptly puts it. The unspoken hierarchy of farmers -- the hardest workers, the hardest drinkers, the shrewdest land-grabbers. This book is the reality of farming life; good and bad, and yes, downright nasty sometimes. But what the reader ultimately comes away with is awareness of the abiding tie between farmers and the land and each other.

This is the second book of Melissa Hanson's I have read. I know she had a big part in bringing me back to God. Over the years I had strayed and with the lose of my 3 babies and all the death and God questions I was getting from our three boys. I felt I needed to find out more. This is a highly religious account and Melissa isn't telling us her thoughts on the bible or Jesus, she is only telling us what is in the bible. She is right on target with all of her stages of grief. If I could meet her I would hug her. Her other book "When Mourning Breaks" She didn't have any living children and I was heartbroken for her. Then when I bought this book I was rejoicing with her. In this society today it is hard to find people that understand what you are going through and through her books, Melissa became a friend. Please consider this a very supportive book but also very Christian based. I needed the reassurance that I will see my babies again someday.

This book is the sometimes painful, sometimes hopeful recounting of one woman's journey to parenthood. This journey includes fertility treatments, two miscarriages, and a tentative pregnancy. The story focuses around the author's first and second miscarriage and her struggle with grieving and understanding.

This book has a VERY Christian viewpoint. There are very few pages without bible verse on them. A great deal of Melissa's struggle is with her relationship with God. I don't think this is a bad thing in this book, and I know many Christian women will relate with Melissa, but it may alienate others.

I, for one, wish I had been "warned" of the heavy God/bible/church focus of the book. When I ordered it from Amazon, there was no description, just one reader review. From that review, I felt that the book would be very helpful for me to read seeing as I have experienced 4 miscarriages myself. I was taken aback by the Christian focus, but I did read the book from cover to cover, and found that Melissa and I shared many thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Melissa does a good job of describing the grieving process, and she does a reasonable job of explaining the causes of miscarriages.

If you've had a miscarriage, you will get something from this book. If you have had a miscarriage and are deeply Christian, you will get A LOT out of this book.

This book was such a blessing to me after miscarrying my last three pregnacies. The grief and tremendous pain that I felt after the death of my babies left me empty and alone. The author shares the experiences of her own miscarriages and the journey from spiritual pain to healing. The author also shares her thoughts concerning the reaction of others to the subject of miscarriage. This helped me to understand some of the comments made by others and to forgive their lack of knowledge. It was comforting to connect with someone that understood how I felt and to find out that my thoughts and feelings were normal. A lot of people don't realize the loss associated with miscarriage which makes it sometimes difficult to find support during such a time. This book was my best friend when I needed it the most. Thumbs up for this author for exposing her most intimate feelings so that others can be helped.

I ordered this book several weeks ago, before the review alluding to the heavy Christian theme had been posted. I, too, wish I had had some indication of the book's very religious content. I think a statement on the back cover of the book best sums up what potential readers may want to know: I Can't Find a Heartbeat invites all who are grieving the loss of an unborn child to sit at the feet of Jesus and allow Him to heal your broken heart.

I had a miscarriage several months ago, so naturally I could relate to Melissa's struggle to find comfort and answers. I just couldn't personally relate to the very religious journey she took in order to find both.

I actually read this a while ago, and its amazing how many of the images stayed with me, and that doesn't happen too often. Some of the scenes are warm, some of them are pretty scary, but they feel so real. I really admire the writing in this book and wish the writer did a sequel. I can even picture it as movie. And I love the characters, which also seem very real, like you met them somewhere. This isn't just a great western, its also just a great novel.

The story was very dry and left too many loose ends.

This book isn't a western but a frontier novel. You don't get much shooting, but you get episodes that are more realistic and more compelling, at least for me. I believe what happens to these characters, whereas I don't believe much in most of the genera westerns. It's more like Willa Cather (who I like) than Louis L'Amour (who I used to like). But what I loved most about the book was that you really felt what was happening to this poor woman. The scenes are very poetic. I still have certain images in my head. I really recommend it.

This was recommened to me by a friend who thought I'd like it, and I did. For once, a woman is the main character of a western, and I found myself indentifying with her struggles in this alien environment. She's an easterner who's brought kicking and screaming to Kansas by her husband. I get a real sense of life out on the prairie, and I get the feeling it reflects the real west, not the western myth. Loved the ending--rather poetic.

Mrs. Moser's style is fun, fast, interesting. But the theology seemed forced and unreal. And I was irritated (that's not really a strong enough word) that men were written out of the lives of these women, all the way to the end. I understand life's difficulties and bad men, but they were truly inconsequential in this novel. Bailey was redeemed, I guess, but he was still irrelevant in the long run. This book was very frustrating and unreal in the end.

Although I liked the story I didn't like the way it ended, it had me lost the way it ended.

The title is exactly the basis of the book; it's hard to state it any more clearly than that!
Nancy Moser is so good at bringing every character so fully to life you may even catch yourself talking back to them. The premise of the book, "totally surrendering your ALL to God, no matter what your ALL may be" is a tough subject that Ms. Moser not only meets head on, but also gives wise counsel to throughout the book. As usual, I become totally caught up in reading one of Ms. Moser's books and cannot put it down; the details of every plot twist keep you locked in to the whole story. So many nice little twists and turns keep you turning pages long after the rest of the house is shut down for the night. And even once you've closed the cover there's the questions that this inspired writing has raised into your own consciousness. Could you do what Claire has done? Would you be able to surrender all to God? Shouldn't you be more able to give up everything to one who gave His life for you? Thank you Nancy Moser for another terrific book, and characters that will continue on again, we hope, just as Merry did.

You know how often the middle of a novel languishes? Just kind of sits there doing nothing, as if the author is just biding her time between the kicking beginning and the strong finish? You won't have that problem with A Steadfast Surrender. The characters Nancy Moser introduces once her main lady, Claire, arrives in Steadfast, are memorable, to say the least. My favorites are senior citizens Blanche and Ivan, a crotchity widow and widower who can't deny their attraction to each other--but will have you in stitches trying.

There are teenagers in trouble, middle-agers in conflict, and everything in between--all being challenged through Claire's bold actions to ask themselves whether they, too, are willing to say "yes" to God.

I highly recommend this book. In my opinion, it is Moser's best to date.

The fun of this book is the main characters of Rep and Melissa and the itinerary references. The weakness is and that, at times, the literary references occasionally seem forced and get in the way of the story, and the complete implausibility of the plot. But it's worth a look if you're in the mood for something light that will test your memory of literature.

The tone of this novel and the author's attitude toward murder and mystery fiction, is immediately encapsulated in the prologue. "First degree murder is punishable by death in Missouri, even if the victim is an editor of romance novels." Reppert G. Penneworth, top copyright lawyer and his wife Melissa go off to Kansas City to explore the possibility of groundbreaking legal stuff, something most lawyers aspire to. He's dropped almost immediately into a puzzling murder case involving Civil War re-enactors, a publisher, a philandering editor, a huffy romance novelist, and a raft of other engaging characters. The books is replete with literary allusions, clever dialogue and one of the smartest amateur detectives to grace the pages of mystery fiction in a long time. Now, writing new copyright law may sound a bit dull, but be assured, it isn't, not in the deft hands of this author.
This is a very well-written novel, moves with great pace, avoids pitfalls of deficient logic and rockets to a teriffic ending.

Michael Bowen is a "writer's writer." With smart, stylish prose he weaves together various aspects of modern pop-culture, from Reality TV to romance novels to Civil War battle reenactments. His characters are likeable, their conversations are lively, and when a gunshot rings out in the Kansas City library, you know you're in for a wild, bookish ride. It's all-hell-breaks-loose in the Heartland, over-the-top fun.

Intellectual property lawyer Rep Pennyworth figures he'll do just about anything to bring in a big-bucks client. He'll even spend a weekend as a civil war reenactor while he tries to decide whether the publisher really can trademark the idea of a faux civil war unit. He can't figure out how the publisher could make any money at it, but that isn't the lawyer's job and a hundred thousand bucks is real money. But when an editor ends up killed and Rep's friend Peter is the lead suspect, Rep realizes he's going to have to do more than dry lawyering--he'll have to figure out what really happened before Peter is sent to prison.

The dead man isn't exactly a saint--he had an affair with Peter's wife, for one thing--which gives Rep and his wife Melissa a cast of suspects. But the police like to follow the obvious, especially when Peter's civil war cavalry sabre tests positive for the dead man's DNA. Plenty of library research into civil war battles and Vichy France politics, as well as a scad of literary illusions add depth to the story as Melissa tries to decide which philosopher to use to advise her friend--finally to decide on Travis McGee (of John D. MacDonald fame) and Rep finally agrees to play Nick and Nora (of The Thin Man fame) with Melissa.

Author Michael Bowen dishes up plenty of plenty of literary illusions for fans of mystery and literature, a clever opening scene involving a potential affair and reality T.V. and some interesting looks into civil war reenacting. I thought that the final revelation into the badguy's ultimate plot was a bit over the top, but that didn't stop me from enjoying the adventure, the witty dialogue, or the way nerdy librarians, book editors, and intellectual property lawyers become action heros.

This book documents the friendship and political careers of two of the Confederacy's most important statesmen. Davis does a nice job of providing historical detail while also weaving a readable story. However, at times, the prose is too informal and almost needlessly dramatic. Moreover, much of the history is quite derivative, as I learned very little new information about the men in question or the political tenets of the Confederacy. His previous book, "A Government of Our Own," is a much better historical treatment.

Davis has written many books and this is one of his better. Robert Toombs and Alexander H. Stephens are both important figures in the Confederacy and in American political history of the ante-bellum period. The book points out the intimacy of these two and gives an insight into the background of the Confederacy. It should not replace a biography of either of these two statesmen.

Toombs and Stephen examplify the problems within the Confederate
government. These incredibly close friends of the strong Georgia delegation were powerful national political figures whose bitterness over personal issues, Toombs, and Stephens' strict constitutional views undermined the Davis administration. Stephens never seriously worked with the dominating Davis and was later opposed to the administration over constitutional issues in the face of bigger war emergencies. Toombs loses the opportunity to become the first President by his bellicose enthusiams for the office coupled with drink which lowers his place in the new government and raises Stephens' star. Excellent description of both men including Toombs rise as Secretary of State, his anti-Davis stance and his mercurial and short military career. The author also covers the end of the era of both men including Stephens' attempts to rewite history in a light more favorable to him then his actions were in reality. These two powerful men and closest of friends could not see the big picture of the war seeking their narrow views in spite of the war effort. Together with Governor Brown of Georgia, they represented a crisis of independence within the Confederacy that no doubt contributed to the fall of the Confederate government.

What a delightful little book! And frankly, I don't often use the term "delightful" in a book review. *The Union That Shaped the Confederacy* is a swiftly-paced, lightly written work that details the friendship of a pair of Georgians - Robert Toombs and "Little Alec," Alexander Stephens.

It is very important to know exactly what you are not getting with this book. You will not get a standard biographical treatment of Stephens and Toombs, and author Davis makes this abundantly clear from the outset. You will not receive great insights into the minds and thinking of these two men, but will come to appreciate the antebellum, war-time, and post-bellum periods of American history as these two men saw it.

William C. Davis does not attempt to make his subjects either heroes or villains on the Confederacy's stage. They were what they were - friends who for the most part held similar political beliefs, worked for the same ends, and became, as the war progressed, more and more bitterly opposed to the administration of Jefferson F. Davis.

Because of the nature of the work, the reader receives a slice of Civil War-era history from a perspective he or she would not likely get. Along the way, one receives insights into the functioning (and dysfunction) of the Confederacy's Executive Branch, as well as the building of the "loyal opposition" to Davis's administration. We see the strengths and weaknesses of these two prominent Georgians, as they struggled to establish a new nation out of the old.

Davis's writing style is loose and fast, and almost reads as if a good friend is telling a story of another pair of friends. To some, this may be distracting, but I found it to be just part of the story. *The Union That Shaped the Confederacy* can be read quickly, with a great sense of satisfaction. This book comes highly recommended.

Like Larry Berman's No Peace, no honor, The Vietnam War Files did not reveal anything new that has not already been known. For instance, the madman theory...or Nixon's poker face...
it seemed to work all right in the Yom Kippur War! The book is also based on selected documents to support the author's views on the Vietnam War. I own the cd-rom version of the Haldemann diaries and there are also numerous entries that support Nixon and Kissinger's memoirs that have been ignored. The fact that Anthony Summer's tabloid and propaganda book Arogance of Power is treated as a credible source doesn't help the books objectivity either.

Also, the books is obsessed with the percieved Nixon myths (mainly, trying to end the war and prevent the holocaust that he predicted would happen if the U.S. abandoned Vietnam). There are several myths about the war but very few of them have anything to do with Nixon and the war. After all, it seems that the media and historians have forgotten that it was not his war. Nixon was given the difficult task of cleaning up the mess left by JFK and LBJ.

At less than 370 pages, THE VIETNAM WAR FILES / UNCOVERING THE SECRET HISTORY OF NIXON-ERA STRATEGY by Jeffrey Kimball is a small book, compared to the size of the ax which it is attempting to grind on how poorly American policy works in those areas of the world where a quick victory is not in the cards. The longer version of the story, told in NIXON'S VIETNAM WAR (1998) by Jeffrey Kimball attempted to cover the years 1953 to 1973. The events of those years were rather awesome in leading up to the final situation, which is covered in depth in this book, described in the Prologue as carrying the analysis onward "from 1969 to 1975" (p. 3) to show how events conformed to expectations in the way Robert McNamara had expected the odds to be about even already in December, 1965, when considering how the war was going to present even tougher choices down the road.

Those who were most interested in how awful Vietnam turned out as a big step on the road to American hyperpower status will not be surprised that Kimball's epilogue to this book begins with insights on `historical myth' and `mythical tale' from those times before declaring that Nixon's and Kissinger's memoirs "were self-serving, incomplete, and obfuscatory, and they took legal and administrative steps that delayed the release of relevant documentary evidence about their policies, strategies, and motives." (p. 297). There was no good reason to tell Americans that power could make us more hyper than we already had been, but Kimball is good at finding the secrets which show how hyper the drive for American power has become.

I like books which make secret policies a major quest in the historical area, and this one laments the fact that not much has been found yet about Cambodia. History is such a dynamic pursuit, with odd quirks popping out from weird angles, that I doubt any adequate explanation of that bit of secret policy will ever be forthcoming. People who thought that Americans needed to fight in Nam so San Francisco would be safe see that argument fail when it is applied to Cambodia, South Vietnam's only neighbor south of Laos, where a peaceful situation prior to 1970 rapidly turned into a victory for enemies of civilization in any form advanced enough to unleash a massive bombing campaign, as a demonstration of hyperpower capabilities when bombs were dropping like the cards in a game of 52 pick up.

This book is most game-like in its use of card terminology for the Nixon strategy, which even carries over to "Mao Zedong and other Chinese leaders had coincidentally decided that it was time to rejoin the world of nations, play the American card against the Soviet Union, and, especially, use the opportunity to get U.S. forces out of Taiwan." (p. 299). That might seem like a bit much for the Chinese to hope for, but a tape on Nam reveals Nixon saying, "Oh, I don't mean to tell, tell Thieu we're getting out in the fall. But it's moot, because we are without question gonna get out . . ." (p. 168). That was from Oval Office Conversation no. 527-16, Nixon, Haldeman, Kissinger, and John Ehrlichman, 9:14-10:12 a.m., June 23, 1971, in which Kissinger said, "Now, our cards, starting now, our cards are going to start falling." (p. 167). Three weeks before, a press conference brought up antiwar sentiment `that American intervention was immoral' (p. 160) and a tape of the following morning, June 2, 1971, reveals that Nixon was "very agitated during the conversation. Pounding his desk at one point, he vowed, . . . He would use his `card' of massive bombing." (p. 161). Since American troops were there, "it is certainly immoral to send Americans abroad and not back them up with American power!" (p. 162). Nixon might be a bit unclear about what actually happened after the French left North Vietnam, but he was worried about allowing "the bloodbath in South Vietnam that they had in North Vietnam where 50,000 of our good Catholic [unclear] of Danang [a city shown on the map facing page 1 along the coast southeast of Quang Tri and Hue in South Vietnam] were murdered, 500,000 were starved to death in slave-labor camps [pounding his desk]." (p. 162). In the next page of the transcript, it is a footnote that describes "Nixon is shouting and pounding his desk, while Kissinger is trying to speak." (p. 163). Like Khrushchev taking off his shoe to pound on a desk at the United Nations, hyperpowers believe in their ability to emphasize what they say when considering options like "We're gonna take out the dikes, we're gonna take out the power plants, we're gonna take out Haiphong, we're gonna level that goddamn country!" (p. 163).

Sometimes it is difficult to make sense of the conversations contained in pages 127-294, from Le Duc Tho's observation "It will take an unlimited time. We don't know when, or whether, it will be done. If it does not work, you will have the choice to remain in Vietnam or leave." (February 21, 1970, p. 129) to "It is a tragic situation. I am deeply troubled by what has happened . . ." (a proposed response on April 3, 1975, p. 294). Nam was unique in being a country in which the United States found itself opposing an established government with a lot of half measures which Nixon didn't want to limit himself to:

KISSINGER: Mr. President, if you had been in office '66, '67--

NIXON: --The war would be over--

KISSINGER: the war would be over, and, and, they'd be fewer casualties--
(p. 162). In '67, even General Westmoreland thought we were winning, but he was never sure the war was over. As far as policy goes, Nam is like an intelligence test that never quits for people looking for vicious evidence of American cruelty. Even Osama knows about Nam.

Much of this book is predicated on the newly released Nixon tapes; thus, it offers many new insights. However, on page 20, the author implies that the first draft lottery was held in 1971. The first draft lottery was held Dec. 1, 1969 and took effect in Jan. 1970.

Kimball's Vietnam War Files is a followup book to his award-winning Nixon's Vietnam War (1998). Both books break new ground on the history of the Nixon-Kissinger phase of the Vietnam War inasmuch as they both draw on a treasure trove of declassified documents from both sides of the conflict, clarify controversies about Nixon-Kissinger strategy, and reveal new information about the Nixon administration's handling of the war and about Communist Vietnamese strategy. The Vietnam War Files is briefer than Nixon's Vietnam War, but it includes numerous additional documents that were declassified between 1998 and 2004. Many of these documents consist of Kimball's own transcriptions of conversations between Nixon and Kissinger in the Oval Office about key strategies and decisions. There is new information about Nixon's highly secret nuclear alert of 1969, the Madman Theory, détente with the Soviet Union, the opening to China, and many other issues, including the Nixon-Kissinger decent-interval exit strategy. All of the documents in The Vietnam War Files make fascinating reading. More importantly, they demonstrate how solid, smoking-gun evidence (here reproduced in the form of substantial excerpts from paper files and transcribed conversations) can help readers break through the long-standing, politically charged debate about Nixon, Kissinger, and the Vietnam War. This was one of Kimball's purposes in writing the book: to substitute good evidence and sound logic for biased argument. The Vietnam War Files is Kimball's third book about Vietnam. His past writings have also included articles and essays about war and diplomacy. He has also interviewed some of the key policymakers on both sides of the war.