During the Great Depression, thousands of Americans went to work in the Soviet Union which seemed to hold the answer to the failed policies of Capitalism. Stalin’s demand that electrification be brought to every corner of the Soviet Union meant that dams, railroads, in fact, all the basics of a modern industrial state be built in record time. In order to do this, Stalin made agreements with major U.S. firms, such as Ford, G.E., etc for entire factories including their key workers. U.S. citizens were promised good working conditions, housing, etc. on multi-year contracts to provide the managerial and technical expertise to complete and help manage those projects. Other thousands of Americans signed contracts to work in the Soviet Union on various projects. The history of this migration is told in an excellent book by Tim Tzovliadis, The Forsaken. In his book, he describes how they had to surrender their U.S. passports and for thousands, it meant they could not leave the Soviet Union. As Stalin’s projects were completed, or his paranoia increased, many were arrested and sent to various prisons and gulags.

Scott’s book gives us a ground level view of the living and working conditions at the steel city of Magnitogorsk. That city, built literally in the middle of nowhere, was sited there due to the proximity of the raw materials needed for the production of steel. Unpaved streets, lack of sewers, communal living with poor food, extremes in weather, lack of proper clothing, tools and no safety procedures give us an image of a wild west town which fought against nature and man’s stupidity rather than against rampaging Indians. Yet, people flocked to the area for work and because they believed they could be instrumental in building a better, freer, more equal world. Their idealism is wonderful to see, but also sad as what they are doing is helping to build a totalitarian state which would slaughter millions of their co-citizens.

This is an excellent book which gives the reader a look at history from the trenches.

One of the advantages of building a library is the luxury of being able to go back and re-read the books which are worthy of being in your library. There are certain books in my library that I have read several times over the years; why? Some are wonderful novels (such as the trilogy by Sienkiewicz) or the dissent novels by Rybakov. Others are histories filled with a myriad of facts or insights (think of Richard Evans, Richard Overy or William Manchester). I love that they can clutter my brain with obscure facts that I can pull out during a conversation or discussion on a related topic. Those books are special and fall into a special category of those which can be re-read every five years or so and be as fresh and entertaining as the first time they are opened.
Retribution by Max Hastings is one of those rare military books that falls into that special category. It has all the prerequisites of a great history book. It provides a broad overview of events, then focuses down to the strategies and tactics involved in those events. Another key element is that it is loaded with obscure facts which I find so interesting and even useful (in the right company at the right time), an example of the obscure is when he writes about the development an problems with the largest single expenditure of the war (even more costly than the Manhattan Project). Did you know that “The construction of a B-29 required 27,000 pounds of aluminum, over a thousand pounds of copper, 600,000 rivets, nine and a half miles of wiring, two miles of tubing.”. Do you care? But it is that type of detail that when you realize the U.S. produced thousands of those planes that you begin to realize the enormity of the war. Or that with the defeat of Nazi Germany, Canada announced that only those citizens who did not wish to stay in the war to defeat Germany could cease war activities.
His narrative is especially excellent when he goes down to the basic level; that of those doing the actual fighters. Some are British troops fighting in Burma, one of the worse areas of combat in the war and the least reported and celebrated. The humidity, rains, foot paths which turned into thick, boot sucking mud, poor food and an enemy who fought with determination even though many died of hunger. What about the survivors of the kamikazes? How could they survive, how many volunteered, how many were drafted into the ranks and how did it feel for those who taught the new pilots to see their poorly trained students take off knowing that they were doomed. Every nation which fought in the Pacific is highlighted as brave and pathetic stories are woven through the book.
This was my third reading of this history, and it will occupy a special place in the library; a place where timeless quality of writing and research is noted and I confess, I shall read it again in a few years and enjoy it just as much.

What would happen if the United States was hit by a limited nuclear attack; an attack that because of the electromagnetic pulse given off by atomic weapons, all auto engines, computers, telephones, refrigerators, in fact, anything build after the mid-1970’s that ran on electricity was simply fried, incapable of working? That is the premise of this novel and no, it the attack was not carried out by terrorists but by the Soviet Union (the book was originally published in 1984. Yet, because of our concern over the possibility of terrorists getting a nuclear weapon, this book has suddenly had a second resurrection.

Aside from the obvious problems of tens of millions of Americans suddenly being forced to live as their great-great-great-great grandparents did, suddenly learning to farm, seldom being able to travel more than a few miles from their homes unless they had a horse, there could be the problems of parts of the United States going off on their own as the Federal government is either destroyed in the attack, or unable to impose its will beyond a short radius from their offices. Suddenly California, the Golden State creates heavily policed border crossings, not to keep out Hispanics, but to keep out millions of Americans who do not want to face typical winters and food shortages because coal is not available to heat their houses. Perhaps the old border between Mexico and Texas will become a no man’s land as local war lords fight both the Texas and Mexico governments as they try to create their own country. For those lucky enough to have cars or refrigerators build before they relied on computers, where will the fuel come from and how long will electricity be provided each day.

Finally, will countries like Japan, China and the Europeans see the natural resources of the United States as easy pickings to be plundered as the price paid from medicines and basic technologies will be provided on a rationed basis to the United States? Which of those countries would have a vested interest in having the U.S. become strong again when we could be kept weak and provide a willing work force.

Think it cannot happen? Think we could bounce back quickly? Then let me ask you this; if we had that type of catastrophe, if suddenly your car, your computer, your phone could not work, how long could you survive in such a brave new world?

Well written, thought provoking. Worth a read.

Herodotus according to Cicero is the Father of History. Does that mean that before Herodotus no Greek or Persian did not write history? Hardly, but Herodotus brought discipline to the subject by going out and speaking with locals, comparing their stories, examining the area of which he was writing and then drawing a conclusion as to the validity of any given narrative. This may not sound terribly new or exciting, but remember that he was writing history of the Greek and Persian wars around 460 B.C.
The book itself can be a hard read; imagine reading a novel by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, only instead of Russian names you have ancient Greek names (with no modern equivalent) and the story is in an area of the world where the locations have entirely different names than the areas are called today. Added to that, there are numerous “tribes” and “nations” that are long gone and that you have never heard of before in your life. Yet, in this translation (by Tom Holland), there are traces of wit and even sarcasm sprinkled throughout the six hundred plus pages. One learns from practices and a view of the world that sound strange and often silly, yet they are no sillier than the fears that the sailors of Christopher Columbus’ time had as they embarked on those voyages.

To be sure, historians after Herodotus have taken him to task. An example is provided by the German military historian, Hans Delbruck when he questions if Xeres could really field and army of 4,200,000 men. In volume one of his History of the Art of War, Delbruck points out that a German army corps of 30,000 men covers about fourteen miles even without its supply train. Given that modern fact, Xeres army would have a column of march of about two thousand miles! Additionally, Delbruck uses other historical records to shoe that certainly the numbers on the Greek side could not be realistic due to the known population of various cities at that time. Further, Delbruck questions the battle tactics as described by Herodotus, especially on the Greek side given the distances and the weight of their armor. Yet even with his numbers and logic, the detailed description of the Persian and Greek forces is excellent and believable.

To his credit, Herodotus presents an entirely different picture of the Persian king, Xeres. Contrary to popular history, Xeres is presented to be a brave, loyal and wise ruler, willing to take counsel and suggestions from those trusted individuals around him. He certainly must have been an interesting individual in an age of petty lords and tyrants.

I found that the best way to read this enjoyable history was to take it in small doses; a few pages so that the names and locations do not overwhelm the enjoyable writing. There are age old lessons to be learned from this book; nations and peoples come and go as other peoples move due to famine, drought, or pressure from other peoples; bravery in battle is honored as is loyalty and honesty, and war is and shall always be with us. This is the perfect book to read while one has a good cigar, a fine beverage, a comfortable seat, and the time to savor what one learns.

First published in 1942 in Italy, Luigi Albertini’s The Origins of the War of 1914 (three volumes, about 2200 pages) traces the political, diplomatic, and military causes of the war, going as far back to the compromise between Austria and Hungary in 1867 and its impact which would ripple through Europe for decades. He takes the reader step by step along a path that ends in war. The way he lays out the events in Europe, one can see with the advantage of hindsight how so many European decisions naturally led to war.
The work itself is recognized as one of the two or three most important books on the subject and Albertini provides the reader military and diplomatic dispatches, notes on policy meetings held by France, Germany, Russia, and other nations. We are exposed to the lies, corruption, political back biting and conflicting interests of the leaders of nations and those who serve them. Just as today we face what is known as the “deep state,” in nineteenth and early twentieth century nations, generals, bureaucrats, industrialist, and others followed their individual interests, often at the expense of their own nations.
Humanity with all of its weaknesses and faults parades before the reader who is left shaking his or her head at the sheer number of foolish decisions. There is little nobility to be seen as:
• We see the stupidity of the Russian Czar who did not realize that he could not mobilize only a portion of his forces and the generals who lied to him.
• We see the Italian leaders who dreamt of expansion in the Balkans with the result that they sold their nation to the highest bidders.
• We see the German Kaiser, known for his bluff and bluster who pales as he realizes what is about to be unleashed thanks to his overweening ego.
• There is the Kaiser Franz Joseph, an old, tired man used by his Chief of the General Staff into issuing an ultimatum which no nation could accept.
• The assassin, Gavrilo Princip never regrets unleashing a war that would lead to millions of deaths and would open the door to a second war with tens of millions of dead, all in the name of a “Greater Serbia.”
• Britian’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Sir Edward Grey did not realize the danger Europe faced even though his nation had been in a naval race with the strongest land power in Europe.
• France fueled the rearmament of Russia in order to encircle Germany in a war of revenge using tactics that had cost them the last war with Germany.
There is no end to the players who each did their part to bring on the war. The list of long forgotten European foreign ministers, generals and officials can be daunting to keep straight precisely because none of them acted in a responsible manner, one which would slow down the slide to war.
Nations and their leaders have long memories. A quick decision by one nation can lead to a grievance of another that will last for decades. Yesterday’s allies are tomorrow’s foe for as Charles de Gaulle said decides later, “Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.” Unfortunately for Europe, the treaties of both sides were honored and paid for with the blood of millions.

It used to be that you could look to the future and see a never-ending landscape of progress for humanity. Medical care will be better, technology will make our lives better, famine and warfare will gradually disappear as increased wealth will eliminate the need for people to struggle. This history is about the building of the nation we know as France, a nation facing fundamental questions and challenges. As I was reading this history, I was struck by an almost mirror image of the building of France and the decline of modern-day France.
The area we know as France in the late tenth century was a patchwork of little more than warlords, robber barons and petty “nobility,” each vying for advantage over each other. Alliances were made and broken, religious persecution was widespread, and government was a concept that could only be viewed as an idea. It was a time, as Hobbs would say, when life was, “solitary, poor nasty, brutish and short.” Yes, there was the concept of the Holy Roman Empire, but true government in most of Europe was a dream for philosophers.
Out of this time however, through a series of wars and marriages, one family, the Capetians, became the most powerful monarch in Europe for nearly three-hundred and fifty years. From an area centered around Paris but dwarfed by more powerful lords in Burgundy, Aquitaine and several others, the Capetians managed to not only survive but came to master those other lords and create a more centralized, feudal state. It was no easy task as with each success came not only more power and responsibility, but also more demands. The Pope wants a crusade, a powerful baron has ambitions of his own, the cost of a state requires enormous amounts of money on a consistent basis, and more. Those demands must be met but there was no blueprint on how to manage those demands and thus there were times when the growing Capetian kingdom was close to failure time and time again. Yet the men and powerful women who headed the growing kingdom managed to keep forging ahead.
This book brings together a number of figures from the past that helps to give us an image of the times. Edward I of England, also known as “Longshanks” and the “Hammer of the Scots” (think of the movie “Brave Heart”), Eleanor of Aquitaine (the movie “The Lion in Winter”) and others. They all lived, fought, created, and ruled during a common time of political and economic consolidation. Yet despite such a prolonged period of power and the ability to deal with the challenges of time, the Capetians fell from power. They were not defeated by a stronger military challenger, but rather by the great weakness of a dynastic power; they died out. While there were still individuals who could lay claim to the Capetian throne, the one direct descendent of a Capetian king was fathered by a Valois which was the next dynasty to claim the throne.
The period involved in this history is not exactly a topic for everyday conversation, so the numerous and overlapping names may be a bit confusing for the average reader. But the book is well written, full of interesting historical tidbits and humor. Not exactly a “I can’t put it down” but a history that will bring you back simply to see how it all ends up.

Before his death in a car accident in 2007, David Halberstam wrote over twenty excellent histories. His attention to detail and accuracy were hallmarks of his work and this enabled the reader to become immersed in his telling of history. I first was introduced to him by reading The Reckoning which traced the decline of the American auto industry under the assault of the carmakers of Japan. He is perhaps best known for his analysis of the origins of the Viet Nam war in The Best and the Brightest where he reviews the actions of the “Whiz Kids” of the Kennedy and Johnson administrations.

The book he was most proud of is The Coldest Winter. In it he not only discusses the failures of the U.S. military, the arrogance of Douglas McArthur and the weakness of the Truman administration in the face of the legend of McArthur, but provides the perspective of those on the sharp end of the bayonet; the common infantryman, squad leaders and others who fought a wily and driven enemy.
Having just a few short years before beaten the Nazi and Imperial Japanese war machines, one asks how such a vaunted military could perform so poorly against an enemy inferior in every measure of military strength except manpower. The answer lay in arrogance, upper echelon officers who kowtowed to McArthur and inflexibility in meeting not an enemy on the level ground of Europe, but one who fought in the hills and mountains of Asia.

There are few officers who come off well in this book. One of the few is Major General O.P. Smith, the commander of the First Marines during the battles near the Chosin Reservoir. Resisting orders to scatter his forces in a vain attempt to constantly push forward as directed by Tokyo (McArthur’s headquarters), Smith instead kept a firm hand on his excellent troops to make sure they knew they were acting as a team and were not cut up into weak and exposed positions.

Another leader who stands out is Matthew Ridgeway who was a rising star at the end of World War II. Ridgeway managed on infuse morale into an all but defeated American army through his personal style of leadership. He was seen everywhere; at the front lines, at the chow lines and others, always talking to the troops, listening to them and making them feel that he had their personal wellbeing in mind. At the same time, he demanded much of them, but unlike McArthur, he could be seen, his presence felt and his insistence of getting the troops off the roads and into the hills where the enemy hid and hit from, brought out the best in the troops.

Finally, there is the question of why President Truman put up with the disrespect and insubordination of McArthur for so long. Truman had to put up not only with McArthur, but also with powerful D.C. politicians who saw McArthur as a replacement for Truman and this meant a divided national will. With the successful turn around provided by Ridgeway, Truman was finally able to take decisive action and relieved McArthur.

The finest part of this history however, is page after page of personal experiences by American troops. You will feel drawn into their lives as they fought, often wearing summer uniforms in sub-zero temperatures and suffering from bad logistical support against human wave attacks, day after day, with seemingly little regard for the enemies’ losses. At the same time, given the vivid descriptions provided by Halberstam, one can only image the miserable conditions of the North Korean and Chinese “volunteers” who were driven forward by Communist commissars. Those troops, often barefooted and having even worse support, were simply cannon fodder used by a system that could always count-on hundreds of thousands of poorly trained but docile replacements.

If you read only one book on the Korean war, make it this one.

“The worse the society, the more law there will be. In Hell there will be nothing but law”
Grant Gilmore

Recently the governor of California signed nine hundred new laws into being. Each law will carry various civil and/or criminal penalties and will be further clarified by various rules as determined by the various agencies which will enforce the new laws and rules. Do you know how these new laws will impact you, your life, your family, or business? How many of them will make your life better or easier? Yet, you will be expected to abide by these laws; ignorance of the law is no longer a defense.
In this excellent book, Justice Gorsuch gives numerous examples of how federal laws and rules can be abused by the authorities and how naked we stand before the power of the State. An example is the fisherman who was charged with violating the Sarbanes-Osley Act (instituted after the housing crash of 2007 and aimed at financial institutions) when two federal officials miscounted how many fish he had caught with the result that he lost his business, home, and retirement savings. In the end, the Supreme Court found that he was innocent, but he lived a twenty-year nightmare and received no restitution.
That ex-fisherman was fortunate for he had the nerve and outside help to fight the system, while others often charged with multiple “crimes” from multiple agencies simply plead down their “crimes” in order to try to get on with their lives. And what chance does the average person have when you take the example of new laws in California, multiply it by fifty states and then add on and average of fifty-six new federal crimes every year. In reality, no one knows exactly how many federal laws and regulations carry a criminal punishment, but it is at least three-hundred thousand and growing.

How did this type of system develop? The Founding Fathers were very fearful of a powerful centralized state for they knew from their life experiences the helplessness of the individual. Thus, they created a system of checks and balances in order to limit the power of the central government. They believed that if laws were made, it would be better to have them created at the state level where there was a better opportunity for the average citizen to see, understand and give voice to their concerns.
The system began to change under the administration of President Woodrow Wilson who believed that what was needed was a “science of administration” where “experts” could “straighten the paths of government.” What this meant was that far too much time was spent thinking about the relationship between government and the constitution, and not enough time spent looking for government “efficiency.” And what better model than the Prussian bureaucracy? The Constitution stood in the way of “efficient” government with all of those annoying checks and balances. Better to let expert bureaucrats take the reins of government so that a living, breathing constitution could be created. Despite the failure of “expert” government from the times of Plato and Aristotle, Wilson believed that this time it would be different.

The result is a system where Americans spend 9.78 billion hours to complete federal (not counting state and local) paperwork. To put it another way, “Suppose that we assembled every resident of Chicago and insisted that for the entirety of 2019, each one must work forty house a week engaged in just one task; fill out federal forms. By the end of 2019, the 2.7 million citizens of Chicago will not have come within four billion houses of the annual paperwork burden placed on Americans.”
How do we change a system where the average citizen is lost in a maze of laws and rules drawn up by bureaucrats who are not judged on their service, but rather who have a vested interest in creating new rules in order to expand the bureaucracy? The answer is not simple and must come in large measure from the average American. Justice Gorsuch points out the woefully inadequate amount of time and money spent in educating children on civics. In fact, while the federal government spends about $.54/student on education for STEM, it only spends about $0.05 on civics. The result is that only about thirty-two percent of millennials believe that it is “absolutely essential” that “civil rights protect people’s liberty.”

A more encouraging step is Proposition 315 in Arizona. Under that law, any new rule from the bureaucracy which would cost $500,000 over a five-year period would have to be examined and agreed to by the state assembly. In other words, the law makers would have to realize the impact of their laws (which unfortunately Congress gave up years ago). This proposition is strongly opposed by the League of Women Voters as it would give lawmakers a tool to block rules with which they do not agree!

In the end, we face a lopsided battle; the bureaucracy which cannot be fired nor held to account vs. the average citizen who has no idea what laws and rules they face every day. We can only thank those few strong individuals and those who support them for showing us with their struggles the leviathan we face every day.

Unfortunately, too few histories, written by Vietnamese of the First and Second Indo-China wars have been available in English.  The author, a former General in the South Vietnamese Army provides an excellent history especially of what is commonly called the Vietnam War (2^nd Indo-China war).

A very good read, he covers his family history and education under the French system and then his service in the military.  He is very honest in discussing the friction in the South between the military officers who came South after the expulsion of the French, and the Southerners in the military.  The infighting and politics of the military led to waste and corruption, not to mention a lack of overall strategy.  He also is honest about the corruption of the politicians and their inability to offer the average citizen a truly viable alternative to the Communists.  Finally, he destroys the myth held by some of the benign policies of the VC; he discusses their tactics such as beheading, slaughter of families who supported the government of the South and their reign of terror to enforce their will.

He takes pride in his professionalism and gives long overdue credit to many of those in the South who fought with skill and dedication to hold back the invasion from the North. He writes about numerous battles where the troops of the South we able to defeat the VC and even the better supplied (near the end) North Vietnamese.  After Tet and the decreased American support, we see a slow downturn of the ability of the South to hold back the open invasion by the North which was lavishly supplied by the Soviet Union and China.  As time progressed the Democrats in the U.S. Congress reneged on aid; trucks and tanks were short of parts, tires, etc. while the North could move South via thousands of Soviet trucks.

The end was tragic for all parties.  A million dead, bravery squandered, families torn apart and more. 

An excellent book I can recommend to anyone interested in that long war.

When we think of war, we tend to think of great campaigns, great Generals, and the struggle between nations. The countless small battle actions done by the millions of people who make up the battles are often overlooked. We know no individual combat action by any of those millions will be decisive in the war, but taken together, they create the victory or defeat in war.

The battle of the River Plate, off the coast of Montevideo in mid-December 1939 was a single action that was not a major factor in the loss by Nazi Germany. It was a battle that was more symbolic for the British and a lesson learned by the German Navy. On the surface it was a battle between a German “pocket battleship” and the British navy; one ship against a professional navy that could call on aircraft carriers, battleships, heavy cruisers, and other ships by the dozen. Logically, there was no doubt of the outcome of the battle, yet it had to be fought for war is not a gentleman’s game.

The German ship was the Graf Spee, a lone ship whose main purpose was to seek out and destroy Allied merchant ships in both the Atlantic and even the Indian oceans. The presence of such a ship, armed with six-eleven-inch guns put every merchant ship, destroyer, and light cruiser in harm’s way. If the Graf Spee could not sink any ships, her existence and presence would disrupt the passage of merchant ships and with every ship valuable to the survival of England, she had to be hunted and destroyed.

The author does and excellent job of outlining and following how the British reacted to the realization that the Graf Spee was lose in the Atlantic. They immediately reached out to their major ports to gather ships capable of destroying the German raider and created several hunting groups. From the North Atlantic to the Med to the southern tip of Africa, heavy units of the British navy all joined the hunt for the Graf Spee.

For anyone not familiar with navy ships, the book does leave something to be desired regarding the match up between the Graf Spee and the British; speed, armor, firepower are briefly covered by the assumption seems to be that the reader at least has a glancing knowledge of these topics. Also missing are the stories of the individual sailors for both sides. Anyone who has read the excellent Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors by James D. Hornfischer will be disappointed at the lack of personal depth in this book.

In the end, the British sank the German raider, the war moved on to the Battle of the Atlantic and one episode in a great war ended. Yet today, it is a tradition when sailing off Montevideo to sail over the graveyard of the Graf Spee and think even if only briefly, of those men who fought and died some eighty-five years ago.