Military Law Books

Max Boot has done a great job presenting a concise and interesting history of U.S. military action in other countries. It is very informative and entertaining. I think it should be added to high school curricula so that young people could have the opportunity to learn about and respect the USA's role in the world and especially our awesome marines, soldiers, sailors & airmen. I am sure there would be some very lively debates in the classroom.

One of the best books I have read about our (USA) involvement in a surprising amount of insurections and affairs that required more than the State Departments attention.

I was given this book and I cannot say that I would have it would have jumped out at me when buying books. That said, it was great and have a much better sense of what happened on a global scale during those inter-war periods in US History.

The first half of the book moved at a very quick pace with great story telling- he made people like Stephen Decatur, Smedley Butler, Frederick Funston, and their pupils come to life. The book attempts to take a neutral bias on the causes of the interventions and focuses on describing what the 'man in the arena' did once he got there to carry out his orders. And because these conflicts aren't well know, this is a good introductory book to the topic...while I don't want to ignore facts, I also don't want to get bogged down to the point where it isn't enjoyable to read. The second half got a little bogged as he moves to arguing the implications of fighting a small war with big war tactics (Vietnam) as well as his arguments against the Powell Doctrine and the outlook.

I thought that he bounded the problem well, and stayed within the bounds.

I first read this book several years back, as a young Sergeant. When I first read it, the book seemed to make a lot of good points, and its logic seemed almost ironclad. After having gotten a bit older and a bit wiser, and having been taught at least a few formal critical thinking techniques, I now believe that Mr. Boot's book is pretty much wrong from cover to cover. He basically tells us how great and wonderful our military interventions have been to the world (and to our security), but when you start to look more deeply at his examples (Philipines, Haiti, etcetera) you start to believe that the truth is a lot more complex than he makes it seem.

I am no pacifist, and in many cases our intervention may truely have been unavoidable or have improved things, but the case he makes is almost entirely one sided. Look no further than his analysis of Smedley Butler's change of heart. *sarcasm* Obviously the man simply didn't see "the big picture". After all, a General with decades of experience in the very campaigns Boot cheerleads couldn't possibly be at least somewhat right in his criticisms. */end sarcasm*

I give it two stars because Mr. Boot is a good writer, and he knows how to make his argument seem irrefutable, even when they are very debatable. Just my 2 cents.

The more history I read, the more I admire historians. Writing good history is not easy. You can be overly academic and the book becomes dry and boring, or if one just strings together interesting stories the book lacks intellectual weight.

The Savage Wars of Peace hits the mark. It finds new ways to tell old stories in a new light. Most military history focuses on the big wars and big battles (think D-day and Gettysburg). Many prominent historians have made careers stating the American way of war is based on mass and attrition.

Max Boot takes a different angle. Those "small wars" that pop up in-between the big wars are just as vital to U.S. military history as the big wars. As America looks toward the future of warfare it is looking less like Battle of the Bulge and more like numerous occupations of Haiti. The book carefully moves though American's small wars and demonstrates how similar they are and how regular, irregular warfare really is. The book is very pro-Marine Corps, but they are the ones who fought most of America's small wars and published the now famous "Small Wars Manual" in the late 1930s.

The book was written before the U.S. intervention into Iraq, but it does predict many of its problems. The first half of the book is stronger than the last half, and the last chapter sort of rambles, but it is by far the best military history book I have read this year. Well worth your time.

This one has a simple plot like "True Crime"- but it's nothing special. Badly needs savage editing as it's at least 100 pages too long. A good editor would have given it a double tap at inception.

What more can I say. Martini's Madriani seris is one of the best and Double Tap is no exception

In the eminently readable page-turner "Double Tap", Martini's many strengths shine; unfortunately, the book also has a few flaws. Interestingly, I was not bothered by the dialogue, noted elsewhere as a weakness, although I must agree that the overdescriptions were occasionally distracting. Rather, my major objection is the lack of originality of the premise to this book.

More specifically, Martini employs the overused theme of a conspiracy to deprive citizens of their privacy in the name of national security. He also spices it up with the figure of a former general cast as the untouchable villain, which I found a little too convenient and quite unrealistic. The combination of the two, while expedient in a day and age when the public is only too sensitive to these themes, is also woefully lacking in originality, certainly enough to knock the rating down by one full star.

My other complaint is the formulaic structure of most of Martini's books, but then I'll be the first to say that the formula generally works. The problem is that, to those familiar with the author, identifying the perpetrator from an early scene, or at least harboring strong suspicions, is quite easy. Still, motive and means take a while to be revealed, and there are a few red herrings here and there, so not all elements of the mystery are given away. And while I saw any references to Madriani's uncle Evo as stagnation points rather than welcome insights, the plot is generally taught and flows well. In their aggregate, these points may not seem enough to knock the book down another full star, but three and a half were not an option.

As for the book's strengths, the legal proceedings, realistic or not, keep the reader on the edge of his seat and, in general, Martini's style puts you right there in the courtroom, or wherever else the action is. Also to the author's credit, Madriani is spared from starring in a protracted "action scene" requiring razor sharp reflexes and the resourcefulness of a recon ranger to survive. These elements, as inconsistent with the middle aged lawyer's character as they are, would still be considered necessary by some authors, and it is to Martini's credit that he manages to reduce them to a very tolerable level both in duration and intensity. Equally inconsistent love scenes are absent altogether without the book's value losing one iota.

All in all, while not Martini's best, this one will keep your interest to the last page.

Paul Madriani is a lawyer facing one of the toughest cases he has had for a while. A case that has already been walked away from by a high profile lawyer for undisclosed reasons. His client, Emiliano Ruiz, is accused of killing the head of a large software company, Madelyn Chapman, in an unusual style used by Special Forces called double tap. Given his military background, the placement of two shots in rapid succession into the target's head is something that Ruiz knows how to do. Add to that the fact that he served as Ms. Chapman's bodyguard, had an affair with her, and his gun was used in the killing, and the net of circumstantial evidence around Ruiz is pretty tight.

Paul and his partner set out to gather evidence that can either clear Ruiz or at least cast enough doubt on his guilt to save his life. The way the two of them go about their task reminded me a bit of Joe Friday and his partner Bill from the old Dragnet series. Their investigation keeps hitting roadblocks whenever they look into a seven year gap in Ruiz's records or try to find out about a shadowy general who was working with Madelyn on a secret software contract. The trial begins with Paul in possession of little evidence to help his client. Someone, it seems, wants to keep a lid on things and the lengths they are willing to go to keep their secrets may be the only hope Paul has of saving Ruiz.

I found the story engaging and the plot very plausible, but the book didn't always flow smoothly. At times it seemed like Steve Martini left off without finishing some thoughts and I couldn't tell whether it was his writing style or laziness. I also had to go back over the dialog in several places to understand just who was speaking. The inclusion of some historical perspective in the glimpses into the life of Paul's uncle Evo added depth to the book. Still, if he weren't an established author, I wonder if Mr. Martini could catch the eye of an editor with this offering.

If a book doesn't keep my interest I will drop it in the middle and I don't review books that I don't finish. The fact that I post a review means that the book is pretty good. I'm not a fan of lawyer stories (I don't think I've ever stayed awake through an episode of Perry Mason) but I finished and enjoyed Double Tap. If you like courtroom drama and a good mystery, I recommend reading this book.

[...].

While I am a huge Steve Martini fan, I was a little concerned when I read the dust jacket blurb about this book. I'm not a big fan of military thriller style books, and from the description, it appeared that he had moved closer to that genre than to the legal mystery category. However, judging books by their covers can be very deceptive, and this proved true with this book.

This is a wonderful legal mystery with numerous twists and turns. Steve Martini provides just enough peripheral characers as to make it difficult to really figure out who did it, and why. He also keeps you hanging until the end trying to figure out how the trial will end and whether his client will go free or fry.

The characters created by Mr. Martini are fantastic, with enough detail to make them interesting and little enough detail to know them too well. I particularly liked the prosecutor, whom Mr. Martini gave the nickname of the "Death Dwarf".

Finally, his characterizations of Harry Hinds and Paul Madriani are great. Unlike many writers of legal mysteries, his attorneys do not speak as if they came from a "silk stocking" law firm, but rather from the real world they would occupy. Harry is his usual smart mouthed self, while Mr. Madriani continues to be the calmer, and smarter of the two.

I highly recommend this book, along with the others written by Mr. Martini. I am now looking forward to my next chance to catch up with Harry, Paul and the others in his next book.

This book picks up where 1634: The Galileo Affair left off, with Frank and Giovanna starting up a Committee of Correspondence and Sharon Nichols heading up the United States of Europe's embassy in Rome. The primary focus of the book is the political machinations within the Catholic church, with Spanish cardinals led by Cardinal Borja attempting to disrupt the effectiveness of the USE-friendly Pope's reign. There are also the more personal stories of Sharon and Ruy's blossoming love and wedding plans, as well as Frank's initial exploits as a tavern owner and revolutionary.

The book starts out rather slowly, not grabbing the reader's attention and not progressing towards any obvious conflict or resolution. On its own, the first half of the book was quite disappointing, I'd say a weak 3-star rating. Luckily, the second half of the book really picks up the pace and develops into a very dramatic and exciting finale. More up-timers become involved, including Tom and Rita Simpson and Sharon's father. War breaks out in Rome, finally providing some action to a series that has lacked substantial excitement in the last couple of books. Covert operations to pull allies out of the way of impending disaster, fully displaying the utility of up-time weapons, make for a great ending. The book concludes without wrapping up the situation in Rome, demanding that a sequel be published sometime soon.

Overall, better than the previous couple of books and advances the story (at least in Italy) around the Ring of Fire. Recommended for fans of the series.

Once you accept the premise in the first volume of this fun series (1632), following the many characters and how they affect history as we know it is fascinating and believeable. No wonder there are three volumes for 1634. How long can the authors keep this up? For a while more, I hope.

This is a splendid addition to the 1632 series, but as a standalone it may be a little confusing. Read The Galileo Affair first, especially. I have read this volume at least 5 times, and it improves with every reading. The characters come alive on the page like few other authors can do, and I can't wait to see what happens to Sharon and Ruy next! Buy it, buy many copies and force them on all your friends!!

I love the rest of the books of this series, but this one falls flat and basicaly makes little sense. I had to ploww my way through it hoping for something better. Some good fight scenes at end. But Whew! the rest!

If you can avoid this book, do so. It is boring, unreasonable, and doesn't even end well. I like this series in general, but this book stays in Rome the whole time, and swaps all the interesting plot implications for some characterization and mediocre action. Even if you have the rest of this series, this one isn't worth your time--if you can't avoid it, mine's selling cheap in the used book section.

This book is one that I am glad I picked up and read. I saw the cover and was intrigued by it, but even the cover doesn't do the information inside of the book justice. I am a college professor and I read the book a few months back; I am teaching from it now. Much respect to Mr. Boothe for penning such a necessary and informative piece of work, and I look forward to more fresh and insightful writings from him in the future.

really great and informative book. I really enjoyed reading it and mr demico boothe is a very well informed and gifted brother whom I wish all the best to.I would hope that mr boothe would view these comments.

This book should be required reading for all Americans, but especially African-Americans. Lots of knowledge and info about the subject that you won't get in the media. EVERY black person, male or female, who is in prison should read this, every drug dealer, every single mother, every gangbanger, every black congressperson and lawmaker, every black businessman, and every so-called scholar that wants to speak on the subject of criminality and imprisonment and lawmaking. This is the truth coming straight from the horse's mouth.

I was drawn to this book by the title alone, I have a son in the federal prison and sent him a copy as well, hope he reads it and passes it on to others in prison. I will use this book to try and defer youth from going into the criminal justice system.

Its okay black men. If you need someone to blame, blame it on my great grandfather. But you'll get no sympathy from me. Be a real man and be responsible for your own actions!

This book is a highly interesting book on psychic research and its practical applications. Numerous federal agencies have done serious experimentation in the field and found the subject to be quite valid and practical. Many high ranking officials, Generals, and even a past American President speak to the good utility of psychic applications. And numerous specific and previously confidential cases are illustrated. I highly recommend this book to all interested in this subject. I also hope the author will consider doing a new edition of the book.

This was the first book that I read concerning Remote Viewing. It was well written and easy to read. It had some meat and substance as well as some great stories of the Remote Viewing sequences. It got me interested in the subject and made me hunger for more. I recommend this book. It is really quite good, and the paperback version is just the right size for carting along with you.

This is one of the most comprehensive and detailed books I have ever read on the remote viewing program. It is a well balanced look at the program and the various remote viewers who were part of it. Despite the "findings" of the likes of Ray Hyman, there was a lot of good work done by the likes of Ingo Swann, Patrick Price, Joe McMoneagle, etc. I highly recommend this book.

I have read most of the books out there on remote viewing and this one -- REMOTE VIEWERS -- is by far the most professional and engaging effort. The writer, Jim Schnabel (whose most recent book was on aging and immortality) is a science journalist and an outsider, and a clever and funny writer with a streak of wry humor this reader very much appreciated. So many non-fiction books today are written by participants in the stories, but few if any of those authors can resist the temptation to varnish the truth. Pick up (but don't be foolish enough to buy) a book by McMoneagle, Morehouse, or one of these other characters and within a few pages you'll know what I mean. A lot of them weren't even aware of the history of their own government program, but clearly got bits of that history (and even then did a poor job of putting it together) by cribbing from Schnabel's book. Schnabel seems to have done the fundamental historical work on this subject. I notice that his book still outsells the other ones, even though it's been out of print for over a year!

"Remote Viewers" by Jim Schnabel remains as the most comprehensive book on the history and development of the Remote Viewing Program within the United States as any I have ever read. His perspective as an investigative reporter from the outsider being exposed to the phenomenon of RV research for the first time, gave him the unique opportunity to take a more broad view of the entire history of the subject, and the personalities involved. The astounding developments of notable "psi events" obtained through the methods employed by the various RV teams keep the reader turning pages in fascination while at the same time weaving in the history and step by step development of the different techniques used to achieve those astounding events. Instead of a singular biography, as so many of the RV books have become, this book is more of a collection of biographies, and unabashedly even covers the tensions and personality clashes that occurred under such a stressful and competitive project.
Such "psi events" include seeing and being able to accurately illustrate people and places distant in space and time, the ability to influence the health of individuals by mental prowess, telekinesis, even the ability to affect electronic equipment at a distance by powers of the mind alone. Further to his credit, the author gives a detailed description of the competition between various countries to develop such techniques, leaving this reader further convinced of the urgency of continued and more varied research into this subject. In reading this book for the second time, I became more acutely aware of a phenomenon called telepathic interrogation, where remote viewers were able to negotiate with the mind of soviet spies over a distance, without the soviet spies even realizing what was taking place! It makes one wonder, when contemplating to the conversations we have in our minds when making decisions, who it is we are actually debating with! Like any great goal that is sought, the RV phenomenon is not without risks as well, and those are discussed in this book, although few specific cases are given.
I found the information within this book both encouraging; in as far as we have come in this taboo subject in a relatively short time. On the other hand, it is also discouraging, in that at least as far as we are told, the lack of funding for research in this field has resulted in a stagnation of what should become the greatest hope for humanity, rather than a mere instrument for war. I cannot help but wonder, does it never occur to any of these countries, rather than "remote influencing" a target into cardiac arrest, why not "remote influence" the target into philanthropic, or humanitarian goals? I am further discouraged that loss of funding seems to prohibit a broader investigation, such as the Chinese work with light frequencies showing up on sensitive film as a result of remote viewing, on page 233. It would seem there are several avenues largely open to further investigation, such as historical procedures for engaging the "signal line", or remote viewing under hypnosis.
"Remote Viewers" by Jim Schnabel remains, in this reader's opinion, the primer for all those interested in exploring first hand the mysteries of psychic phenomenon and its application in today's world.

This is the second book I have read by Alfred McCoy- the first being The Politics of Heroin. I think it was a decent read. However, I enjoyed his first book much more- perhaps, because I have already read several books that delve into torture by the CIA and military. I think the book is very informative and delineates for the reader the origins and history of torture in the United States leading up to present day psychological (with some physical) interrogation techniques. He argues, backed up by various professional military and FBI sources, that torture does not work and actually leads to more conflict. Furthermore, using such brutal methods of interrogation does not provide the necessary intelligence that establishment sources desire and makes the terrorist threat larger by enraging those who are part of it- directly or indirectly. I think he is spot on in this matter and does a good job of presenting the facts of torture that haunt the military endeavors in Afghanistan and Iraq.

However, I am a bit surprised to find out that Milgram was funded by the CIA (so said according to McCoy). I would definitely would like to know how he was able to come up with this information- is there a source or evidence? It just seems far fetched. However for the time being, I will keep an open mind and wait for a second edition (which I am sure will come eventually) to find out if he details his proof. Recommended but keep in mind that one should take the Milgram piece with a grain a salt until further evidence is available.

Professor McCoy has done research all over the world, and is the definitive voice on this subject. This book is shocking and disturbing and absolutely essential to an understanding of what should be a major issue in our nation and the world. We should be above such ugly, inhuman tactics - but are we?

I read this book on the recommendation of a liberal friend whose views I respect, and with whom I've had many civil arguments about the subject of interrogation of known terrorists who neither have the rights of U.S. citizens nor those of genuine POWs (i.e., they weren't captured in uniform, they don't take direction from a centralized authority that recognizes the rules of warfare, etc.). So it's fair to say that I started off as a skeptic.

But this book utterly failed to persuade me of much of anything I hadn't already either accepted or known. Mr. McCoy is hopelessly naive and lacking in a sense of genuine moral, political, or social proportionality.

For instance, he writes in the introduction: "Compared to weighty matters of state raised by Abu Ghraib, Watergate, narrowly construed, seems little more than the failure of one man's character; Iran-Contra an isolated albeit intriguing incident at the sunset of the Cold War; and above all, l'affaire Monica Lewinsky sad, sordid, and forgettably partisan." If you are the sort of person who can swallow that sort of ridiculous hyperbole -- i.e., someone who thinks anything that happened to in one foreign prison can genuinely compare to what was quite literally (not just metaphorically) the threatened destruction of representative democracy and the Rule of Law (if Nixon had continued to defy the judicial and congressional branches) -- you'll enjoy this book.

Mr. McCoy also relies extensively on value judgments on extremely subjective matters from "experts" whose expertise is nonexistent. For example:

"Although seemingly less brutal than physical methods, no-touch torture leaves deep psychological scars on both victims and interrogators. One British journalist who observed this method's use in Northern Ireland called sensory deprivation 'the worst form of torture' because it 'provokes more anxiety among the interrogatees than more traditional tortures, leaves no visible scars and, therefore, is harder to prove, and produces longer lasting effects.'"

One wonders whether this "expert," this "British journalist," had the opportunity to observe Iraqi parents as their children were fed through chipper-shredders like tree limbs by Saddam's secret police. That's a "no-touch torture" that I, albeit as ANOTHER non-expert, would consider to be quite a bit worse than any sensory deprivation imaginable.

I do not doubt Mr. McCoy's patriotism, but rather his wisdom. I do not doubt his sincerity, but rather his judgment. There is a certain type of idealist who believes in absolutes, who judges everything and everyone who falls short of perfection to be utterly ruined, and who will follow the internal logic of his positions into ridiculous extremes. I'm afraid Mr. McCoy proves himself to be such an idealist through this book.

It's well and good -- indeed, it's critical -- for us to continually remind ourselves of the need to adhere, as a society, to the strictures of civilization that distinguish us from the barbaric enemies who would ritually rape and mutilate our daughters before beheading them for wearing eye shadow or a two-piece bathing suit. But I do not believe that Mr. McCoy grasps that there are GENUINELY, indisputably EVIL men who, by their conduct and their dogma, have knowingly and deliberately done everything possible to forfeit their rights to be considered part of humanity. For my daughters' sakes, and for Mr. McCoy's (if he has any), I'm perfectly happy to forfeit Mr. McCoy's regard: He can call me a barbarian if it makes him feel smugly superior, but by and large, I support the official policies that the Bush-43 administration has promulgated.

I can and do draw practical, moral, and legal distinctions between, say, crushing a testacle on the one hand, and playing loud rap music while humiliating someone with fake menstrual blood on the other hand. I weep NO tears at all for someone "tortured" in the latter ways -- none. And this book gives me no reason why I should.

This quote is variously attributed to Churchill, Orwell, and others, but it's true: "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." I am grateful for them; Mr. McCoy, I think, would have us put THEM in prison, and have the rest of us surrendered over to those who would gladly slit our throats precisely BECAUSE of our "civilized [Western] attitudes." I'm glad he's not in charge.

Halfway thru this book, I found myself asking --- how is it possible that W., Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft are not, right now, serving life sentences in jail? There is something HORRIBLY wrong, bordering on psychotic, with an America where such sick, evil, barbaric acts - from people WE voted into office - people who claim to be deeply religious - can go unpunished.

Human beings were beaten over the course of several days, hooded, until dead while in US custody. This went on for years. The only crime of one of those murdered in our custody was that he went to the Americans to find out the status of his son who we also had in custody.

Dr. King, you sacrificed so much for us. But, we have so quickly gone back to our old ways. Instead of lynching negroes in the south, we now murder muslims in the east - but only after torturing them for days, weeks, sometimes even years.

We hide behind our leaders, who order such horrible acts of beastiality, and we pretend we do now know. Just protect us - we tell them. Protect us -- but don't let us know how you do it. Just do it.

We are no better than the monsters who took down the twin towers.

The abuses described in this book are too well detailed and footnoted to pretend the author is lying or confused. He did his research well and provides ample references for anyone wishing to fact check him.

Why do we allow this? Why do you allow it? Why do I allow it?

We are a lost nation. An empire already beaten by its own excesses.

I am a retired neurosurgeon and quite familiar with the life and works of Donald O. Hebb.

I have just read Chapter 2 of the recently published book by Alfred McCoy, "A Question of Torture."
The chapter makes very interesting reading, but I am chagrined by the number of factual errors contained in this work regarding Dr. Hebb's alleged role in the development of methods of "psychological torture."

Dr. McCoy's most egregious error, in referring to the sensory deprivation experiments conducted at McGill by Dr. Hebb and his colleagues, is the assertion that, "In silent, sadly eloguent testimony to the corrupting influence of this research, it is ironic that Hebb .........should be best remembered today for the work that made him, perhaps unwittingly, the progenitor of psychological torture". It is regrettable that McCoy published this silly statement for public consumption. Clearly, Dr. Hebb is not best remembered for that reason.

At the Canadian Medical Hall of Fame in London, Ontario (into which Dr. Hebb was inducted several years ago) there is an exhibit which cogently displays his major contribution to the field of psychology, that is, the publication of "The Organization of Behavior" which has been compared in its biological significance to Darwin's, "Origin of Species". Dr. Hebb proposed in this book, for the first time, that psychological functions such as memory and learning may be explained on the basis of neural activity. Any knowledgeable psychologist would remember him primarily for this achievement.

Further, Dr. Hebb was nominated for the Nobel prize, became the President of the American Psychological Association and achieved a "distinctive place in the history of twentieth-century psychology", not because of the sensory deprivation experiments but because of his distinguished career launched by his seminal theories proposed in "The Organization of Behavior".

Finally, to refer to Dr. Hebb as a colleague of Dr. Cameron is a real stretch. There was absolutely no collaboration between the two. In fact it is well known that Dr.Hebb had nothing but contempt for Dr. Cameron's work.

It is clear from the report of George Cooper to the Canadian Ministry of Justice that the purpose of the sensory deprivation experiments was to try to understand the methods the communist forces were using to "brain wash" UN solders during the Korean War. Hebb's experiments provided that understanding. Dr Hebb had nothing to do with subsequent decisions by others to incorporate some of the general conclusions of these experiments into interrogation techniques.


It is unfortunate that Dr. McCoy has so distorted the significance of the contributions of this distinguished scientist in order to dramatize his incorrect conclusions that Dr. Hebb was the father of "psychological torture". Dr. Hebb can no more be considered the father of psychological torture than the discoverers of the germ theory of disease can be considered the fathers of biological warfare.

The gross inaccuracies in this chapter of the book must raise questions regarding the bias and accuracy of the research incorporated into the remainder of the book.

Revell, in this co-authored book, believes in the philosophy "never say in 350 pages what you can say in 570."
The events are apparently purely chronological, and almost stream-of-consciousness. There's a lot of jumping from subject to subject, with little transition or unifying theme. While the book has a bibliography and index, it's lacking a glossary, which would be helpful for those of us who don't use acronyms like OSG, JSOC, CSG, and CISPES on a daily basis.
The book would be less cluttered if there wasn't a compulsion to include every incident in which Revell wished to claim credit, or rebut an allegation of misconduct against him. For instance, the liner notes claim that Revell "participated in ... the JFK assassination [investigation]." It turns out Revell wasn't even in the FBI at the time; he was a Marine who was liaison to FBI agents who were interviewing Marines who had known Oswald during Oswald's Marine service.
It is an interesting account of agent Revell's career, and FBI history and lore, mainly from within the FBI bureaucracy looking down, and contains some almost-hidden nuggets of insight on personalities and events you probably won't find elsewhere.
Read _No Heroes_ by Danny O. Coulson for a street agent perspective on many of the same events.

It is an informative novel which gives exciting insight into one of the most famous law enforcement agencies of America. Not only learning about the cases that Oliver Revell worked on, but knowing how others in the FBI, including J. Edgar Hoover, thought and said is purely fascinating. This is a must read to anyone interested in the FBI, law enforcement, or federal government agencies.

I know and work with Buck Revells' brother Dennis and Dennis told me that it was a good read. I knew that if Buck had his brothers integrity and analytical thinking process, that this indeed would be a good read. I was not disappointed. This book gives an excellent insight into the FBI, which given the number of times Buck & Sharon Revell moved stands for Forever Being Inconvenienced. Good facts about the cases involved but not too much given away. It is a good "guys read", fast paced with detail it never gets boring. I enjoyed this and can whole-heartedly recommend it to all.

I'd like to set the record straight about the rebooking of Chris Revell's flight and the speculation that his Father "saved his life" and not others. Chris Revell's flight plans were changed at least two weeks prior to Thanksgiving that year in early or mid-November. Chris had more leave-time than he had first thought and asked me to get him a direct flight from Frankfurt to Washington D.C. so he could spend more time at home. We had been apart since the beginning of August and I can assure you it wasn't anticipated terrorism that was motivating him to return early. My In-Laws were in Australia at the time and my Father-in-Law was in no way involved in our decision to change Chris' flight. Sorry, but the situation just wasn't as sinister as some would like it to be.

The nice thing about freedom of speech is that it helps one to learn the truth. I recommend this book for a well written viewpoint and a non-abusive style from the former Assistant Director of the FBI (with the help of Dwight Williams). Presumably his "nemesis" under Clinton, Director Freeh, has a book written by himself somewhere, and it will only be fair to compare the versions of the two books. In fact, I think that an outstanding Management Course could be made by assigning Revell's book, Freeh's book (or future book - I don't know if it exists), and Bonanno's book giving one of the more enlightened Mafia viewpoints (see my review of the latter). Revell appears to have been an outstanding manager from this book, and some readers may not understand why. Revell has a military type discipline viewpoint with an exceptional respect for justice and fairness rather than firing senior employees arbitrarily or because of political orders or downsizing attempts. It's the type of discipline that Field Marshall Montgomery had (see my review of his book), and to some extent General Eisenhower. Whether he violated law for patriotic reasons I do not know, and whether he is right about Freeh's motivations - that, only comparisons between sources of evidence can reveal. His strong opinion that J. Edgar Hoover was not a homosexual is quite interesting, since Great Britain has found for example that freedom of speech without respect for the public can lead to very erroneous conclusions, innuendoes, etc. As for Bonanno, his idea that the Mafia should not sell dope is quite an honorable proposal (it seems to me).

Just stick with the book through the boring first half and a gem of understanding about our current situation in the Middle East will be presented that puts the war in an historical context. It also helped me understand more deeply than the tv sound bites some of the forces that have shaped and continue to change this important area of the world.

The author Robert Merry is president and publisher of Congressional Quarterly. In this fascinating book he explores various influential ideas about foreign policy common among the US ruling class.

He proposes that the key divide is between the idea of progress, which he claims leads to interventions abroad, and the cyclical view of history, which he claims leads to non-intervention. He presents the five resulting foreign policy options: expansionism, liberal and conservative interventionisms, and liberal and conservative isolationisms.

He notes that Francis Fukuyama upholds the idea of progress, telling us that globalisation will end all history, including wars, as we all become American. Merry notes that Norman Angell presented the same idea back in 1910, predicting that the growing economic interdependence between countries made wars impossible. Now New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, a bugler for globalisation, says that Angell was `actually right', little details like the world wars having clearly escaped his magisterial attention. It certainly seems that the globalisation can only be achieved by wars to impose it on reluctant nations.

Merry himself espouses Samuel Huntington's cyclical view of history as the eternal, inevitable clash of civilisations. But what is peaceful about this vision? Civilisations clash only when states invade other people's countries.

Yet Merry opposes Bush's foreign policy and his bellicosity against Iran, Russia and China. Merry also opposes Bush's policy of getting Turkey into the EU, noting that Bush fatuously said, "As a European power, Turkey belongs in Europe."

Of the current US war against Islam, Merry writes, "In such a war, unprecedented in modern history, probably the most destabilizing approach would be a combination of Theodore Roosevelt's Will to Power imperialism and Woodrow Wilson's missionary idealism. And yet that is precisely the dual policy that emerged from the George W. Bush administration after 9/11." He writes of Bush's "post-9/11 foreign policy destined from the beginning to lead his country toward calamity." Is the USA a crusader state fighting endless wars, with British forces as its Gurkhas?

Merry's primary point is that President Bush's emphasis on "Missionary Democracy" is both naive (a recent Russian poll found 53% opposed Democracy, with only 22% supporting) and likely also counterproductive.

Most of the book covers various theories of history in an effort to build a foundation for analysis of Iraq. However, the book could have instead simply focused on an overall history of Iraq - a "nation" made up of people more loyal to their historic tribes than any overall nationalistic spirit. Thus, Sunni's are likely to relinquish centuries-long control, and the Shia's will not give up their dream of a government dominated by higher clergy. Merry believes that the Bush team failed to think about the likely outcome of deposing Hussein - fragmentation, and should have first listened to experts before proceeding. The result was that the U.S. was surprised to not be greeted as liberators, but instead as occupiers.

Finally, Merry concludes that the U.S. in a cultural "war with Islam." Few others refer to it as such; however, our non-stop insensitive actions (eg. establishing a large, permanent base in Saudi Arabia, support/bias for Israel, prisoner abuses, invading Iraq) that antagonize countless passionate Islamic followers seem to steadily make the situation worse.

The author's thesis stands in and of itself but comes wrapped up in a series of ruminations on Progress, Decline, Toynbee, Spengler and Fukuyama, plus Huntington. This wrapper makes the book very interesting, and yet it is questionable whether the interpretation given is really correct. The question of the idea of progress, after an all too partial history of the idea's own progressions, is then mapped onto the Bush foreign policy. The change of scale is misleading and counterproductive. Similar problems arise with the cyclical views of Toynbee and Spengler. Then the Hegelian End of History thesis is grafted onto the discussion in a way that doesn't quite fit. In a way it is good to raise these issues and attempt the 'philosophy of history' genre as a backdrop to cultural discussion, but the key to doing that has been lost, if it was ever found, and the result is a kind of ad hoc historicism. The idea of progress gets a bum rap these days, and that's not surprising if it is claimed that Bush is its representative. But the idea, on the right scale, is an essential component to historical understanding. The problem is that historical dynamics and the machinations of ideologicalpolicy mongers become scrambled.

I think, beyond the analysis, the cautionary critique of the false universalism of imperial presidents remains of value in the book, but the overall result goes begging for some relief from the cliches of rival pastiche versions of the philosophy of history. Interesting book in any case.
The right way to reconcile the contradictions of cyclical theories, the idea of progress and the confusion over Hegel's 'end of history' can be found in the reviewer's _World History and The Eonic Effect_. The works of Spengler/Toynbee and naive versions of the Progress idea need to be scrapped/upgraded to something more usable.

Besides challenging the reader to think about our foreign policy towards peoples not of our culture, Robert Merry covers a history of the tragedies of the Serbian people. This history I was totally ignorant of and I could not help wondering if our officials in Washington considered the history of the Balkans when we became involved in the Bosnian war. The author is highly readable. His book is a must read for students of the middle eastern culture.

"Crimes of War" is a unique document. It provides a brief but illuminating look into what is broadly termed "international humanitarian law" or the laws of war. Expert journalists, historians, academics, military officials, and international activists provide vivid descriptions of various violations of international law as well as other issues and case studies; for example, "forced labor," "incitement to genocide," "aggression," "Chechnya," "civil war," etc. It is organized like an encyclopedia of human tragedy, basically. The photographs that accompany the entries are powerfully evocative of the suffering they represent, as well.

The subtitle, "What the Public Should Know," is right on target. I think it is vital that all Americans be aware of the laws of war and their violations, both historical and contemporary. Reading a smart collection like this one also gives the reader considerable insight into the nature of international conflict seen as a whole.

From the moment of its publication, I was a fan of this book and have referred to it often. Somehow, this book has managed to condense a complex area of international law into a brief, highly readable, and easy to understand guide.

A project of The Crimes of War Project, this book was designed to serve as a handbook for journalists and other foreign correspondents in the field who routinely cover wars and humanitarian emergencies. Relief and aid workers are usually the first "outsiders" on the scene of such upheavals. However, as the editors point out, "their training usually does not encompass trying to stop or even report on war crimes." NGOs and watch groups have expert staff, but often have limited access to "hotbed" areas and can be slow to respond. Journalists often cannot make necessary distinctions between legal and illegal acts and may not fully understand the international or legalistic import of what they are witnessing. Finally, the general public is often unable to make such distinctions as well.

This book and accompanying website are an attempt to better educate journalists, consumers of news media, and other on the ground workers by providing an easy to use overview in the form of brief entries, arranged by topic of international humanitarian and human rights law, so that we can all better serve as watchdogs and advocates for human dignity and the rule of law.

Both laymen and more informed readers will appreciate the quality of the entries, written by nearly 150 experts from human rights law, journalism, history, the military, and NGOs as well as the strong, graphic quality of the photographic layout by award-winning photojournalists and graphic artists that poignantly--and sometimes shockingly--illustrate human rights violations from a number of recent conflicts around the globe.

Covering topics such as the distinction between internal and external conflicts in international law, the rights of refugees and soldiers, collateral damage, use of biological weapons, incitement to genocide, terrorism, treatment of the wounded, enforced prostitution, guerilla fighters, the rights of victims, and destruction of cultural property, among countless others, Crimes of War manages to cover an astonishingly wide range of topics within humanitarian law, yet remains highly readable and highly accessible to laypersons.

Well worth the price, it's an excellent, easy to understand guide to the internationals treaties and covenants that govern crimes of war and should be a mainstay for anyone who needs a quick and basic overview of topics in humanitarian law and the law of war.

Crimes of War by Gutman and Rieff is simply in a league of its own. It is the first field guide of its kind and deserves the attention it is finally receiving (thanks to the photo of Angelina Jolie reading it.) It is logically organized alphabetically by war crime and each one has an article and photographs to accompany it.

I recommend this for anyone, from a high school student to a professional journalist in the field, who wants to be educated and informed on world affairs and who cares about human rights.

Brooks Simpson wrote:
> HWAYNE wrote:
> > your suggestion that maybe there were no rapes
> > reported because maybe women wanted to be raped
>
> You must either quote where I said this or stand revealed as the liar
> we know you to be.
>
> So which is it?

By the way, on February 1, 2004, Cash, after researching H. Wayne Elliott's previous assertion on this issue, concluded as follows:

"Note that Brooks does not
claim he believe women want to be raped but is instead suggesting that
perhaps HWayne might believe it as an explanation of why HWayne
earlier appeared to deny women slaves had been raped by their masters.
HWayne's claim about Brooks appears to be false."

Now, the best H. Wayne Elliott could come up with in reply was the following:

"Actually, what the fool suggested was that I advocated rape because I posted
an excerpt from a post-war treatise on slavery which included a discussion
of the law of rape and the claim that there were no known cases of whites
raping slaves. Now, the fool decided that merely posting that excerpt would
permit him to distort that into a charge that I must believe that women
wanted to be raped. As there is no way any rational person (Yes, I know,
Professor Simpson would only rarely be considered to be rational.) could
have reached that conclusion from the mere fact that I provided a quote from
a long out of print book, is it not reasonable to conclude that when the
fool made that bizarre statement he was actually revealing his own strange
ideas of rape?"

Ignore the twisted assertion at the beginning: apparently H. Wayne Elliott wants you to believe that he's been accused of advocating rape for reasons best known to himself. Instead, note the admission at the end that I said no such thing, but that it's a product of H. Wayne Elliott's twisted and perverted imagination.

Copy to Jim Flaggart at American Military University.

This A-to-Z guidebook is absolutely amazing. Without falling into the trap of legalese (which is beyond most lay people), this book manages to teach us numerous things about the conduct of war and how difficult it is to apply the numerous chapters and laws in modern conflicts, be they international or internal.

The photographs that accompany most articles are striking; some of them are rather gruesome, but this is war, and the more suffering we see, the more likely we are to commit ourselves to not seeing this kind of inhumanity ever again. To do so, we have to put action behind political rhetoric, to give substance to our words (Vaclav Havel's motto).

I recommend this book to anyone who is interested about the law, war, man's inhumanity to man, and the legal architecture which, over decades, has been taking form to protect us from ourselves.

This book is a travesty, a misuse of important historical sources. These letters, rediscovered by the Dodd family in 1990, should have been compiled into a book by a historian of the Nuremburg trials, combined with letters by Dodd to other correspondents, with notes filling in context and their relation to the historical record. In this way, they would have provided interesting views of Germany after the war and insight into how the Nuremburg prosecutions were put together. Instead, Chris Dodd has put the letters from Thomas Dodd to his wife into a campaign book, with family photos, purporting to show the human side of Dodd. The great romance which is supposed thereby to be revealed amounts to a lonely husband complaining that his wife--who is taking care of five children, one a toddler--is not writing long enough letters. These passages are repetitive and boring. By all means read the book for the historical information--but then go find a good history of the Nuremburg trials.

Dodd's letters truly present the allies (except the USSR) effort to insure that future generations would see the fairness and lawfullness of their deliberations.It comes at a time in history that individuals are being held by one of the allies without trial 5 years after their capture. Nuremburg 1 1/2 year Gitmo 6 years The Taylors, Jacksons and Dodds would be ashamed.Aside from the Legal?Historical perspective the book is an excellent example of a husbands love and devotion. Christopher Dodds has good genes.

This is a great book that provides a unique perspective on the Nuremberg trials. Highly recommended.

After reading Ellie Wiesel's characterization of this book as "an important contribution to history", I wonder if he actually read the book or just skimmed some pre-publication proofs. Mr. Dodd's letters provide more detail about his living accommodations, dinner meetings, and travels than about the war crimes trials or the defendants. The defendants' cases are glossed over. You keep reading, waiting for details, waiting for insight. It's not there. The book is mildly interesting, but adds nothing to our knowledge of the war criminals or their trials.

This book was nothing like expected from the reviews I read before purchase. It started out a little interesting, but quickly became dull, boring, and endlessly repeating, repeating, repeating. I expected the excitement to build, it never did. His fathers letters should have remained a family secret,well hidden if possible, they have no business in print for rest of the world. I wouldn't buy this book again if it was on the $1.00 table at a rummage sale.