A very brief history of some military commanders over the ...
582390
A very brief history of some military commanders over the millenia. There are some important
military leaders that have been omitted in this study.
2532664
Actually a short book about the Battle of Jutland in WWI.  Some informative stories of British Warships.
989121
"Armchair general's talk about tactics, real general's talk about logistics, and experts talk about personnel." I'm paraphrasing a quote from "The Generals" but you get the point. Ricks's book grapples with the history of the US Army's development of its General Officers from WWII to the present day.

Ricks proves himself to be an expert in the subject: taking a careful examination of the nuances, contests, and rivalries between the different schools of thought that educate America's US Army Officers. The heroes and villains of this book (I use the term loosely) are not who you might think. This is not the realm of the battle hardened strategic thinker, it is the world of administrators who try to foresee what kind of generals the Army will need in the future, and thus, which Officers will move forward in the ranks.
The book lays out clear examples of George Marshall's "fast relief" policy prior to, and during WWII, in which hundreds of Officers were ruthlessly removed from their positions, but did not necessarily have their careers ended because of it.

Ricks advocates a continuation of this policy. He asserts that the reluctance to remove poorly performing officers stymies the development of the officer corps, and hinders its ability to forecast and fight the wars of the future. He points out that when generals refuse to remove poorly performing Officers from their ranks, civilian leaders will end up doing it for them.
Ricks makes his case fairly well noting examples across several decades, except one. Ricks fails to examine the handling and behavior of generals in most, if not all of the 1990's. This is a curious and glaring omission. I would have liked to learn more about the cases of General Garrison following the "Black Hawk Down" incident or the removal of Wesley Clark as NATO Commander following the Kosovo Air War.

Aside from this, it is a well written and excellent work.
639288
In Comrades, Stephen Ambrose delves into the topic of masculine relationships....fathers, brothers, pals, etc.  Beginning with his relationship with his own brothers, he moves on to explore the relationships of more famous people...Eisenhower and Patton, Lewis and Clark, and even Richard Nixon (in this case, a look at why Nixon had no meaningful relationships with anyone).  Most interesting though, is his coverage of the bonds and friendships formed between men who have served together in combat.  It is a very short read, but well worth it just for the tid-bits of biographical information that typically would not be found in other history books.
3571950
The Seven Years' War was a very important period.  Marston has done a good job in creating a clear and coherent overall picture, using his very short (91 pages) history book to summarize the war.

Some of the cons of the book are that he hashes through the battles much too quickly, simply stating in a few sentences what happened and so on.  He doesn't mention the main players, with the exception of a few of the generals, and leaves over the telling of the battle to be Britain versus France or Prussia versus Austria and so on.  So the battles are explained in a very generic form.

The pros, though, outweigh the cons.  The beginning chapter and the ending sections are great in that they help to explain some of the more mundane aspects, such as a soldier or nun's point of view from their journals.  We see a summary in the end on how much the war cost and what the effect was on that country and its future.  Additionally, the middle section (which covers the battles of the war) are broken apart by years, and then within the year it is broken down by either North America, Western Europe, Central Europe and India, which makes for a very concise and organized structure that is easily navigable.

This book did exactly what I wanted, which was to understand the Seven Years' War on more of an international level rather than the typically localized level of the North American continent (a much more deep and detail oriented history of the Seven Years' War could be found at _The Crucible of War_ by Fred Anderson).  Although it skimped on the details, I have a springboard to look for further books.  I would recommend only if you are looking for a summary of the war, especially in regards to both North America and Europe, otherwise try Anderson's book.
1342962
An older book (1950's), I suspect it may have been superseded on various topics, but it is a good short survey of the history of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah during the Civil War years, including Union-Confederate battles and skirmishes (mainly in New Mexico), Indian battles, and political events in the four territories. The accounts of the war in New Mexico are lively and informative. The rest is covered in a rather formulaic style, cut and dry in a reference book manner, but covers the ground in some detail. The author has a very simple, clear prose style.
4546940
First, this is not a book, it is a thesis.  It does not have 400 pages of text but about 45 with the remainder footnotes.  There is nothing new that would establish dereliction of duty, but only provides a rehash of differences between the white house and the military during that time.  This is not intended to discredit General McMasters in anyway, rather to simply alert readers that the publishers and the hype are offering something it isn't. The General is clearly a talented leaders who will now have a great influence on our lives.
4113376
An excerpt from the review by StrategyPage.com:

"As with the earlier volumes, this one opens with a short account of each state's regiments in the war, including both militia and volunteers, with redesignations as applicable, and a list of their commanders.  There follows a listing of all colonels from the state who were not promoted to higher rank.  Each colonel is given a brief biography, outlining his background, education, and civil occupation, his military career, post-war life, and burial site, with references.  The entries are frequently illustrated with a photographic image or sketch.  Entries often include anecdotes, comments on the officer's performance by others, information on courts martial, and so forth."

More on StrategyPage. Com
3022045
A nice little book for the price on a nearly-forgotten battle.  Great maps.  Interesting photos.  Well explained background information on generals' plans and thinking.  Has little information about specific soldiers, however (e.g., no mention of Lt. Col. E. J. Pike who earned a Medal of Honor at St Mihiel).

Overall an effective presentation.
294552
The Napoleonic Wars placed enormous demands on Great Britain's limited Army.  One of the places that went short were Britain's holdings in North America.  This older Osprey Men-at-Arms Series book describes the hodge-podge collection of regulars, colonial units, fencibles and militia units that defended Upper and Lower Canada, the Canadian Maritimes, and Newfoundland during the period.  In a very concise 48 pages, veteran historian Rene Chartrand lists the units, along with some details on their service and their uniforms.  The subject is perhaps too large for such a compact volume, but there are some interesting details here for the general reader and the student, such as the difficulties of outfitting units with proper uniforms for the climate.  The color plates of examples of uniforms by Gerry Embleton are first rate.  Dated but recommended.
2084481
Books in Osprey Publishings Command series are supposed to provide a military biography, history of the campaigns the military leader was involved in and, most importantly, a discussion and analysis of the topics style of command with particular emphasis on how he differed from contemporaries of his side (both friend and foe) and what elements of his command style were responsible for his success or failure). This particular volume provides a particularly good history of his campaigns (relative to other books in the command series), a decent military biography (but unfortunately one that does not extend beyond his campaigns such as education, pre-campaign military experiences, etc.) but unfortunately almost no insights into his command style. There is practically nothing on what differentiated him, for example, from military contemporaries, or what the strengths and weaknesses were as a military commander. Hence this reviewer feels that this book is only worthy of a 3 star rating. After all, the examination of command style is what differentiates this series from books that only provide a history of Henry Vs campaigns and biography.
3043552
Evidently Generals have someone who writes down every word (colorful words and all) they say and archives all of their message traffic. After trashing General Westmoreland (unfairly??) in the intro, the author proceeds to qoute General Abrams page after page with only a few references to Ambasdador Bunker or other visiting VIPs. The inclusion of the North Vietnamesese after action reports is refreshing because it doesn't completely flow from what Gerenal Abrams said, although it usually backs up what he said. While I do agree that little has been written on this period of the Vietnam War from the strategic prospective and the man in charge would be the best resource for info, this reads too much like a study of only General Abrams. There is a lot of good info here, but it could have been even better had it been expanded outside of MACV breifing room.
1890921
This short book shares a history of The Star Spangled Banner, which was written during the battle at Fort McHenry. I found the history interesting with many details I did not know. It was interesting how the author related each line of the main verse, to the actual battle. Since I was not familiar with the history surrounding this battle, I would have liked more background information. As a summary, this was an enjoyable read.
2053078
Any review of this product would have to start by stating that it is part of Osprey Publishings New Vanguard series. This implies that the book is quite short, at only 48 pages in length (roughly a third of which consist of illustration of one type or another). Hence if one is looking for an academic tome on the subject, this is not the book. However, given the paucity of material on French tanks during WWII, this is one of the few books, in English, available on the subject. The relevant question should be, how well of a job does the book do given its short length. The answer is very, very good.

The author, Steven Zaloga, one of Ospreys best and most prolific writers, uses his command of the French language to examine and analyze French sources (both primary and secondary) and distills his research into this short book. He does so very well. The book covers primarily the physical characteristics of the French tanks in use during WWII, how French design developed between the wars, what influenced (and more importantly, what limited it) and what the outcomes were in actual tanks that resulted.

Mr. Zaloga points out that there was little French advance in tank development during the 1920s. The main reasons were that France was stuck with what it developed and used during WWI and that there were serious financial constraints after the war. He discusses how French design started to develop at a quicker pace with the Nazi party coming to party but that this development and the resulting tank production was glacial in terms of both quantity and quality. Tank development was slowed down by financial constraints, labor problems, design problems, technical difficulties and French military dithering with respect to coming down to decisions regarding what to produce. It seems that French design and production was slowed down by every possible factor.

By the German attack of 1940, however, the Franch managed to field more tanks than the Germans and the quality, in general (at least in terms of armor and fire power) was better than German tanks. This is despite the fact that French tanks were really, in Mr. Zalogas words more designed for the 1920s than the 1940s. They were slow, did not have much range and usually only had one man turrets and, in many cases, did not even have radios. In addition, most of the tanks were delivered only near the beginning of the German assault. This prevented French crews from obtaining much needed experience and prevented the French from developing operational experience with the vehicles. Hence they not only had poorly trained crews but there was not enough experience, by the high command, in how to service and maintain the vehicles as well as to how to use them. Contrary to popular opinion, the French used these in some force concentration (they were used in company level strength) but, unfortunately, the Germans concentrated their fewer and less capable tanks into far greater and decisive concentrations.

All and all an excellent book that covers not only the physical characteristics of French tanks but also their development, doctrine of use and why they actually proved to be of so little practical use. This despite the books very short length. Five stars.
1400311
A very detailed history of one of those quirks in history where what should not have been turned out for the best in hindsight.  If you are pressed for time and want to just read the bottom line, just skip to the last chapter and avoid the details of which units and commanders fought who.
731356
"Lincoln and the Black Hawk War" is a short, 63 page, introduction to this obscure Indian war, only rescued from total oblivion by the participation of the youthful Abraham Lincoln.  What began as ineffective negotiations for the sale of Indian lands to the Americans in 1831 turned into a war in 1832.  Indians under Chief Black Hawk left Iowa and began raids into Northern Illinois and Southern Wisconsin.  As word of Indian attacks spread volunteers were recruited to supplement Regular Army units in the suppression the Indians.  Sporadic fighting continued until the final battle of Bad Axe in August 1832 resulted in the capture of Black Hawk and began his transportation t Washington where he met President Andrew Jackson.

Lincoln's role in the war was relatively minor.  He was in the service for less than 100 days, during which he saw no live Indians.  He did travel into southern Wisconsin and acquired some leadership skills.  His men elected him captain, a position which enhanced his self confidence and ability to command.  One famous anecdote is the time that he was commanding a unit of marching men until he realized that they were approaching a fence through which they could not march.  He then ordered them to take a rest and to reassemble on the other side of the fence.

But for Lincoln's involvement, the Black Hawk War would re one of the little remembered minor wars litering the trail of the western expansion of America.  Even the participation of Zachary Taylor, Jefferson Davis, Winfield Scott and Robert Anderson, later of Fort Sumter fame, would have gotten it little more than a footnote in history.  It now receives mention in Lincoln biographies.

This book does give the reader a quick introduction to this war and a segment of Lincoln's life.  For anyone with an interest in this struggle, this book is a good place to start.
3084361
Military history is despised nowadays, so I hope that the author deliberately tried to appear as someone who has a very basic understanding of the medieval warfare. The title is misleading: about 3/4 of the book is simply a brief history of the Wars of the Roses with special attention to Tudor family. It is not better or worse than other short narratives. The most interesting part is the Bosworth campaign itself, but not the military part. It is a collection of personal stories about noblemen who stood on one side or the other for different reasons. The whole book is an example of why the focus is important. Write about warfare, or politics, or family fortunes, or culture, whatever, but choose one topic, not everything.