|
|
New User
Posts: 3
| I dont get what your point is reviewing a book by a bonafide Viet vet without reading it. This guy knows more about war and stuff than you could ever imagine. Its disrespectful to do that. |
|
| |
|
Site Owner
Posts: 239
 
Location: Boulder, CO | http://brettschulte.net/ACWBlog/archives/000005.html
I ain't the harshest reviewer. But it's not fair - this guy apparently read it.
As to this point: What astonishes me most of all is that people have been flocking to buythis piece of tripe and that prominent and well-respected historianssuch as James McPherson and John Keegan have put their imprimatur onsomething that has no basis in fact.
That's because they knowo their audience, which is gullible and only wants to read what they already agree to. Keegan, in any case, is remarkably sloppy on American western history. Read what he's written on Custer and tell me otherwise. Also, Viet vets get away with murder among other Viet vets.
Still haven't read it, but this is fully in keeping with the cynical and manipulative attitude that is the hallmark of the Custer author. Most, anyway.
|
|
| |
|
New User
Posts: 1
| It probably isn't true that Custer 'saved the day' at Gettysburg so much as ran to the front of the parade. No doubt he was a brave and earnest soldier. But it's a stretch to make the claims that were made in that book, which I read even if you haven't. There was no basis for some of the conclusions other than sensationalism. Its hard to believe this guy was a soldier, frankly.
I do agree that Stuart was overrated, and probably Lee as well, but I thin k that comes from southern pride more than northern attempts to inflacte, like you say, so Grant will look better. Sotherners have a real blind spot when it comes to that war. |
|
| |
Hyde Park Forums by www.darkendeavors.com
your book "review"
