Harry S. Pariser's Dominican Republic guide is better and does not suffer from the inclusion of Haiti, a country of far fewer tourists and no appeal to most D. R. tourists. I found the North Coast (Puerta Plata) far superior to the East Coast (Punta Cana), one would not understand that from reading this book. No matter what guide you purchase pay close attention to the NEGATIVE reviews of resorts at the web site debbiesdominicantravel dot com. Unfortunately, many who post at this web site excuse substandard accomodations and poor treatment of tourists (like at the Punta Cana Beach Resort), so study the negative reviews of any resort you consider carefully. This is not a bad guide, just not the best guide. Always remember, the D. R. is a fabulous place to visit and perhaps to live.

I was very surprised to read the last two reviews and feel a need to express another opinion. My husband, David, and I just spent six and a half weeks in the Dominican Republic and we found the Lonely Planet guidebook to be very helpful (we did not travel at all in Haiti and, so, cannot comment on the book's coverage of Haiti). But we thought the section of the book that described the Dominican Republic was excellent. The prices were sometimes higher than the book said, due to inflation, but the descriptions were nearly always right on the mark. For example, we decided to climb Pico Duarte, the country's highest mountain, and we found the information provided about guides and lodges and climbing difficulty was very accurate. The author had clearly climbed the mountain and knew what he was talking about. The guidebook include maps of the various routes up the mountain and to nearby peaks and not one of the other guidebooks on the Dominican Republic that we looked at (about 10 in all) had such maps. Also, while we were in the area of Pico Duarte we went to a lovely waterfall few people go to that the author wrote about that wasn't mentioned in either of the other guidebooks we took with us (the Moon book was terrible, incidentally). I also really liked all of the history in the book. The island is rich with Indian history and colonial history and pirate history, and I thought the author did a super job presenting it.

A leader in travel guides, Lonely Plant once again proves it self as the leader in the industry with this excellent guide to traveling to/throughout the Dominican Republic and Haiti. Although Haiti's tourism industry is nearly nonexistent, the guide still provides the readers with information on attractions, accommodations, and safety issues.

In covering the neighboring Dominican Republic, the book provides much more information for this country which has seen a major boom in its' tourism industry since the late 1980s. Always informative with tidbits if information, history, maps, and information for singles and gay & lesbian travelers, the "Lonely Planet Dominican Republic and Haiti" is the best book for anyone planning a trip to the island of Hispaniola. Excellent guide for an excellent price.

The beginning of this book opened with lots of promise but the plot proved to be weak and boring. The story is about an executive from Coke that is going to Africa on business at the same time that he is separating from his wife. He is having doubts about the separation when the plane develops problems and they are forced to land deep in the Congo. A militia group captures the plane and our hero escapes only to find himself lost in the jungle. The rest of the book is about his journey to stay alive while his wife and blind son attempt to find him. During his jungle survival he keeps having flashback after flashback to the point of boredom. I started skimming them after awhile. He actually does get rescued but goes back in search of the young boy that helped him - an act not very believable at that point. The wife is mostly unable to get anyone to help her find her husband - including either government. Nothing is ever said again about his company - Coke. It seems they would have at least attempted to look for him or at least communicated to his wife - an exclusion that I find most improbable. After finding her husband, the book abruptly ends, never tying up the loose ends woven throughout the story, but at that point one almost doesn't care because one is so ready for the book to end. I gave it two stars only because I did actually finish it.

Marcus Stevens is an experienced African traveler with the gift of making the Congo so real that even in the chill spring mist of the Pacific Northwest, I felt the steam rise up fron the lush rainforest floor. In "The Curve of the World," Stevens introduces the reader to Lewis Burke, a man successful in his business, but so unsuccessful in relationships that he is estranged from his wife and young, blind son. On a routine flight from Paris to South Africa, Lewis's plane experiences mechanical trouble and is forced to land on a make-shift airstrip surrounded by miles of virgin Congolese rainforest. Will Lewis see his family again? Will he come to understand that the selling of Coca-Cola isn't--or shouldn't be--the most important part of his life? The adventure and education of Lewis in the Congo was so compelling that I read this book almost straight through. Helen, Lewis's independent and gutsy wife who comes to the Congo with her blind, seven-year-old son to find her missing husband, is so well drawn that I'd swear I know her.

I bought and read this book after hearing Marcus Stevens present at a Book/Author Dinner in Richmond, Virginia. Once I started reading, I couldn't put this book down. This book was two stories in one. One was the ultimate quest for survival after Lewis Burke's plane was required to make a forced landing in the remote Congo. His stories of survival, and subsequent befriending and rescue by a young Congolese boy, were fascinating. I felt like I was in the Congo trying to survive with him! This was intermingled with a love story, and ultimately renewed love between Lewis and his wife Helen. Their relationship had greatly suffered after the birth of their blind son Shane. Their relationship deteriorated for seven years while Helen gave her complete attention to raising a blind child, and Lewis withdrew more and more. Lewis' disappearance in the Congo renewed their temporarily lost love and brought them all back together. I greatly enjoyed this first work by Marcus Stevens and look forward to more from him!

I think Mr. Zbignev Brzezinski - a former US National Security adviser under President Carter - would enjoy the book. This is because 'Casino Moscow' was written by his young nephew - Matthew Brzezinski. Plus it portraits Russians in the most unpleasant light - some people like that! Certainly, to his credit, Mr. Matthew Brzezinski has reached new heights in his creative Russia - bashing. The author has actually moved a full circle from his uncle's traditional Truman-like anti-communism to the age-old loathing of everything Russian by the Polish ultra-nationalist aristocracy from Marshal Pilsudski camp.
I am not sure if this loathing is unjustified, but the question I am asking is simple: is Mr. Matthew Brzezinski really the right person to represent US business community in Russia (as a WSJ correspondent), or may be he is a little biased to bridge Russian and American points of view? No wonder US investments in Russia are less than in Costa Rica.

Man, had I not been to Russia as many times already that I have...and I was getting read to leave and had read this book, I would be too scared to go!! Mr. Brzezinski's book is entertaining at best. It glances over some important parts in today's Russia. However, it is too damn moralistic and bemoans the same whining, bitching and complaining that 98% of all the expats living in Moscow complain about...it's not like home. Well, duh...

If you have been following news out of Russia, this book will add nothing new to your bank of knowledge. If you have never been to Russia and you are getting ready to go to Russia, don't let this book scare you away.

If you read the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, many of the stories in this book will seem familiar to you. They should. Matthew Brzezinski was a reporter for both publications in the 1990s. In this witty revealing book, he shares with you not only the stories he covered but the experiences he had in covering them and living in Kiev and Moscow. The stories are connected by his descriptions of what happened to him, his fiancee, their friends, and the people he wrote about. The book begins with being mugged in his own apartment by a confidence team in Kiev and ends with leaving the country to avoid confiscatory taxation. Unfortunately, he ends up having a regret. A year later, one of his Journal colleagues wins a Pulitzer for her reporting of the aftermath of the Russian debt crisis.

Crony Capitalism is the name that has been applied to the Russian tendency for government officials to share the benefits of special favors with their buddies, and probably get a rake-off in the process. In substance, it is little different than the corruption in many third-world countries. The key difference is that Russia as an advanced industrial country with lots of natural resources had a lot of booty to share. As a result, people arise out of nowhere to command enterprises worth billions. And disappear just as quickly when their sponsors in the government are ousted.

Although these scenes occur in the 1990s, they will remind you of stories about Prohibition in the United States. For example, night spots are publicly rated for the likelihood that criminals will start shooting at each other in them as well as the likelihood of being able to arrange for sexual favors. Business people operate with teams of former commandos as body guards.

The disregard for society's needs is pretty strong. In a section called "The Zone" you will read about visiting the radioactive sites in and around Chernobyl. While the visitors are wearing protective gear and leaving quickly when the radiation count gets too high, people have been bribed with good jobs to come work and live in these dangerous areas without any protection. Stories about six-fingered children and other indications of genetic damage abound.

But the most chilling story for me was about a training session in capitalism run for some youths in a Young Pioneers camp. Set up to mimic a free market, the youngsters were soon counterfeiting money, intimidating each other, cornering scarce supplies, and generally running the show corruptly to favor themselves. It seemed like a perfect analogy for what was occuring in the whole country. With such an ingrained, warped reaction to wide-open capitalism, can Russian have much hope for improvement? I certainly hope so. But, if that is to occur, the prescription will not be found in these pages that outline the abuses.

The stories of daily living are also compelling. If you drive a car in the capital, you will get at least one traffic ticket a day. That's the way that the local Moscow police earn a living wage. On some days, you might get two. For an airplane trip, no one is sure if the planes will take off or land. Great risks are run in the process. Businesses don't pay their taxes, workers, or bills. The new rich seem to be living at the ultimate, while most are desperately poor. Naturally, a lot of this goes up in smoke when the currency crashes in the debt crisis. Savings are destroyed, and foreigners leave behind the billions that they thought they had scored big with.

Clearly, much of the money earned through Crony Capitalism was simply looted and sent to foreign bank accounts. The result was probably to impoverish the country more than it was to begin with.

After you finish this fascinating book, think about where else unrestrained greed has negative consequences. How can the benefits of individual iniative be gained in the context of lawlessness . . . except by joining a criminal gang? That seems like the lesson of this book. Where's Wyatt Earp?

Appreciate your responsibilities to others as a way to ensure the benefits of being supported by their efforts as well as your own.

Weinstein, with the aid of Alexander Vassiliev, was able to gain access to a fairly large number of KGB records from the 1930s through the 1940s. THe evidence from the KGB archives (cross-referenced against US and VERONA documents) show a fairly extensive spy network within the US during the Depression and World War II. The presence of this network was noted and suspected by people such as J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI during the Roosevelt Administration, and it led authorities like Hoover to begin constructing the machinery of what would later be called McCarthyism (for more on this, see Ellen Schrecker's "Many Are the Crimes"). Weinstein's copious notes illustrate this network's very real existence, including such people as Alger Hiss, Whitaker Chambers, and the Rosenbergs. (Not Oppenheimer, BTW)

I stated this was for professional historians -- if you're a casual reader of Cold War or spy history, you may like this book, but I doubt it. The narrative flow is poor to say the least -- there's scarcely any "flow" here at all. I'm not sure if the book was rushed to print or if the nature of the material did not lend itself to good writing; whatever, the book is poorly written. Older ideologues of both Left and Right may be interested; a lot of bad feelings have permeated down through the years due to disagreements over the extent of Soviet spying and McCarthyism. I don't think anyone can come away claiming victory here. Conservatives were correct in insisting that the Communist spy network existed, but at the wrong time. (By the time McCarthyism came around, the spy ring had collapsed, as Weinstein shows.) Liberals who downplayed the existence of the spies were wrong, at least from about 1932-1945, but can also take solace in the fact that the numerous spies seemed to cause no serious damage of any kind. (Even the Rosenbergs, at most, hastened the Soviet's atomic achievement by only a year or two.) Most American communist spies were Jews motivated to support the U.S.S.R. in the coming struggle against Fascism -- understandable; most fell away from the Soviets following the Soviet-Nazi Pact. The extent of spying by the Soviets in no way justified the abuses of McCarthyism, although the evidence Weinstein shows certainly illuminates why that era took on the edge it did.

I reviewed this book in 1999, and gave it three stars. Over time, I've decided it was better than I first thought, and came back here to up it to four...

This book should be required reading for the left wing sympathizers who still maintain the fiction of: a. Alger Hiss was innocent, b. Elia Kazan is a bad guy, c. The Rosenbergs were innocent, d.the Communist Party of the United States was not affiliated with the Kremlin, e. Whittaker Chambers and Elizabeth Bentley were lying. This history, illuminated by KGB files, uncovers the lies and deceit of the fellow travelers and communists who claimed their innocence. They committed treason and should be ashamed of it.

This short book is a courageous gesture on the part of Michael Parenti; certain to anger the right, Parenti just as sharply criticizes the so-called left, taking to task the Greens, NPR and Susan Sontag just to name a few. Perhaps it is this assurance of condemnation from all sides that makes it so imperative that this book be read.

This is a horror story of course, but written with an intelligence and passion that makes the book very difficult to put down. Relying upon White House and Nato press reports, various mainstream media, first-hand accounts and his own visit to the war-torn country, Parenti attempts to tell the untold about a war, the media coverage of which has become a history of retractions and unsustained claims.

This book is as much about media as it is about politics, a fact that bares considering given some of the reviews below, several of which seem to promote an ideology rather than address the book itself. This is unfortunate given the lengths to which Parenti goes to state repeatedly that "Again, it cannot be said too many times: to reject the demonized image of Milosevic and of the Serbian people is not to idealize either nor claim that Yugoslav forces have not committed crimes. It is merely to challenge the one-sided propaganda that laid the grounds for the imperialist dismemberment of Yugoslavia and NATO's far greater criminal onslaught" (186).

To see how Parenti goes about defending this assertion one must read the book. Academic and yet very lucidly written, the book is as unsettling as it is thought-provoking. Indeed, it is convincing, and given the recent arrest of Milosevic and continuing tensions in the region, extremely pertinent.

Parenti's book is not a historical account of Yugoslavia's conquest by the West. Few dates are mentioned and only a rough chronology is followed. Instead it's a valiant attempt to set the record straight following years of drumfire propaganda aimed at toppling the Yugoslav federation and its non-western economy. By no means, is Parenti attempting a whitewash of Milosevich, his regime, or real crimes against non-Serbs. He is combatting the vicious, one-sided campaign waged in Western media against all things Serb or Yugoslav. That NATO has finally succeeded is testament to an overwhelming military and political superiority, not to any inherent rightness in the cause, ( consider the spate of international law violated by NATO's attack). This is the burden of the book and the author handles it well, with documentation and sources outside the usual CNN-NATO axis.

Two key points are worth mention. The vaunted killing fields of Kosovo never materialized despite near hysterical reports all over Western networks. Turns out that many of these claims were based on rumor, exaggeration, or KLA mendacity. That these reports of Serb massacres were circulated as fact by an uncritical media testifies to a level of subservience to NATO war aims, which , not incidentally, work to strengthen European prospects of this same corporate media. Now that the conquest is complete, backtracking is quietly underway, but so what, the damage has been done, and more of the same cheerleading can be expected next time Western peace-keepers go after some rogue nation or crazed foreign devil.

A second point: Parenti documents terms of the Rambouillet conference, a NATO-Yugoslav diplomatic meeting that set the stage for the armed attack on Serbia. Seems this parley was sabotaged from the outset. To meet Western terms for peace, Serbia was required to permit NATO forces to occupy the country, renouncing in effect sovereignty over its own territory. In short, it was a demand Serbia could not afford not to refuse - just as NATO had calculated, and the air attack got underway against what was now portrayed as an unreasonable regime in Belgrade! (This is reminiscent of the diplomatic trickery surrounding talks between April Glaspie, US ambassador to Iraq, and Saddam Hussein, prior to the Gulf War, in which Hussein was told the US had no interest in the disposition of Kuwait or its royal family, thereby setting a trap that Hussein immediately fell into.)

What should be apparent to critical observers, is that truth, goodness, and fellow feeling mean nothing when power and wealth are at stake, regardless of the regime involved. Western transnationals see an opportunity to gobble up the world economy behind a facade of "free trade" and "democracy" and, by god, they're going to do it, whether people like it or not. That's their version of democratic thinking. If this seems an exaggeration, read the book. The truth is out there, but don't expect to hear it on the six o'clock news.

The United States along with other western powers demonized the Serbs and socialist Yugoslavia. Being accused of running death camps (which was a fraudulent charge), and perpetrating a systematic policy of mass rape and mass murder, the idea the Serbs were little more than monsters was inculcated into the minds of citizens throughout the entire industrialized world. In this incredible dissection of the Yugoslavian conflict, Parenti proves the corporate capitalist press (NY Times, AP, Washinton Post, BBC, major TV networks, etc.) rarely wavered in their goal of demonizing the Serbs while virtually ignoring atrocities committed by the pseudo-fascist Croatian forces and Bosnian Muslim forces. As To Kill a Nation points out, Croatian forces massacred Serb civilians fleeing for their lives into Bosnia. At the time Croatia was headed by that minimizer of the Jewish Holocaust: Tudjman - a strong ally of the United States.

Parenti makes it clear the reason Milosevic and the Serbs were and are the targets for demonization is because they were the most resolute against allowing the FRY to be laid open and exploited by international investors, and the IMF and World Bank.

To Kill a Nation unearths fascinating sources pointing out the integral role western intelligence agencies played in financing the secessionist organizations during the 90s - obviously this would work to destabilize the successful mixed socialist economy of Yugoslavia. Wanting to institute free-market reforms, which have wrought misery and ruined lives throughout Eastern Europe over the past decade, the western powers hit on the concept of destabilization in order to do away with the solidarity felt by much of the FRY population.

The key quotes and sources Parenti displays are nothing short of amazing and astounding. During the siege of Sarajevo, which turned much of global opinion against the Serbs, he demonstrates that it was the Bosnian Muslim forces that consistently started the daily bombings and disallowed safe passage to civilians. There's even documentation of Bosnian Muslim snipers secretly firing on citizens in order to lay the blame on Serb forces. The highly touted "genocide" at Srebrenica and Trepca are touched on and quickly proven to be much ado about very little; that is very little compared to the sensationalistic saturation coverage the stories enjoyed. The book shows that Srebrenica and Trepca were not much more than propaganda stories aimed at manipulating public opinion.

When To Kill a Nation turns its sights to NATO's alliance with the organized mobsters, drug dealers and gun runners of the Kosovo Liberation Army, it delves into a rarely analyzed area of world affairs. Parenti astutely broaches the topic of the myriad laws broken when NATO bombed the infrastructure, social capital and political quarters of Yugoslavia. NATO's obliteration of the FRY's socialist economy served a rational class interest for western ruling elites and investors. To Kill a Nation mentions the sad fact that many well minded liberal intellectuals were suckered into jumping on the Serb and Milosevic demonization train and some even countenanced the bombing.

Parenti documents that most of the human rights abuses attributed to the Serbs were committed primarily by the Chetnik paramilitaries who often acted outside the control of top military brass. Some analysts claim the paramilitaries task was not easy due to the difficulty in distinguishing the enemy. To Kill a Nation does a masterful job in pointing out the biases and difficulties faced by the Serbs and anyone else in the FRY determined to keep democratic socialism intact. In fact it's crucial to remember Milosevic was elected in a fair and open contest.

Parenti's book may be the finest work on international politics and economics since Noam Chomsky's American Power and the New Mandarins. Written in a direct and engaging style, To Kill a Nation is one of Verso Publishing's best offerings to date.

This book handles its subject very well. It was the basic text for my 11th Grade history course, where it provided a good balance of mildly amusing wit and genuinely useful information.

The main advantage of "The American Pageant" is that the author is not trying to push a major political agenda. It lacks the patriotic drivel for which "traditional" history texts are often denounced. However, it also lacks the negative, depressing Socialist philosophy which makes Zinn's "People's History of the United States" so difficult to read.

The end result is a history text which does a history text's job: telling what happened. The book covers politics, economics, and major events in a style which is sometimes amusing and usually informative. Although not overly political, it also pays due attention to such important issues as race and gender.

Not a particularly "specialized" book, but an excellent survey text.

I teach Advanced Placement American History at a Catholic High School. We have been using Bailey's ninth edition since its publication in 1991. I truly feel it is the best book out there for my purposes, and believe me I have read alot of other Texts.

Bailey and Kennedy are extremely entertaining, and informative. I and all of my students from the past enjoy their short but funny anecdotes and sayings. I always tell my students that I am not here to defend Bailey but to give his point of view along with other historians.

I read this book first in high school several years ago as part of an advanced placement U.S. History course. I hated it then - but love it now. Bailey captures the depth of the issues the nation faced in each step of its development. His accuracy and profound insight keep the subject matter from becoming too dry. What I loved most about the text is that it never over-simplifies the significant historical events such as the political struggles of the 1st and 2nd continental congresses, secession issues and America's position in both World Wars. He digs deep beneath the surface to paint a thorough understanding of what the root causes were of historic events. The 10th addition adds interesting subsections that profile the various immigrant cultures that influenced American history. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand the nation's history and the people who made it.

Definitely an interesting book, but "not quite there." Lazare's understanding of the strucutrual problems as they relate to the Constitution and slavery was very good, and, indeed, many on both the pro-slavery and abolitionist side argued against the Constitution as it stood.

Where Lazare goes wrong is in the later years. His analysis of the drug war and the government policies that, in effect, subsidized suburbia, were both good, but not really having anything to do with the Constitution, either that I could judge or he could coherently argue. His overarching strucutural approach led him to see a systemic failure when others may see only a failure of policy. To impute the former from the latter simply begs the question.

I'm also not sure why he thinks that government would become more progressive as a result of a more powerful House of Representatives. The notion that many different groups have varied, legitimate, but ultimately incommensurate views regarding what government can and should do presents a blindspot for Lazare. To take his example of the drug war, while it is true that medical marijuana resolutions do well, very few politicians, other than New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson have been elected on a pro-legalization platform. If anything, the prevailing rhetoric has been to get "tough on crime." Yet, Lazare thinks that more direct democracy can and will lead to greater progressivism. Maybe we're better with checks and balances. Also worth noting is that a lot of the strength of American Democracy is that, to use the hoary old cliche, it's a republic of laws, not men. An overarching legal framework has some value, then.

Interestingly, some issues where the Constitution, at least as presently interpreted, may present issues he'd want to discuss, went missing. No real discussion of Campaign finance appeared, and he did not mention voter turnout, once. Does low voter turnout have anything to do with the Constituion? Well, not really, unless you want to use Lazare's ideology, in which the lack of good public transit does. Nevertheless, these strike me as the real issues facing American democracy, but they don't require constitutional overhaul to address.

I also think he does himself a disservice by not really considering any prevailing theories of jurisprudence other than the bi-poles of William O. Douglas and Robert Bork. He also takes Bork's strict constructionism at face value, which is, while unfortunate, does serve his ultimate project.

"The Frozen Republic" is intersting in parts, but really, he's stretching quite a bit to make his criticisms of present policy and discourses a systemic attack on the Constitution, qua constitution.

Lazare's premise is that the Constitution is seriously flawed because of its insistence on checks and balances and the separation of powers. In contrast to the Founding Fathers's view of concentrated power being a menace, Lazare argues that power becomes irresponsible if it divided. Lazare refers not only to the federal government, but also the cornucopia of various governmental entities on the state and local level.

As shocking as this may be, it is a reasonable alternative to blaming politicians, big government, liberals, conservatives, the media, etc. for the inability of Washington to do anything. No one can really be held accountable as the other branches of the government can be blamed for stalling.

Lazare convincingly illustrates the negative effects of this system in his chapter about civil liberties. From the standpoint of the legislative branch (Congress), the judiciary (Supreme Court) is the institution that exists to protect civil liberties. Thus Congress need worry about passing constitutional laws as the Supreme Court would invalidate them if necessary. Of course, if the Supreme Court were to abdicate its role, then no one would be in charge of protecting civil liberties.

Not all of Lazare's arguments are convincing. His link between the separation of powers and urban decay is not entirely convincing. He also declines to thoroughly discuss the downsides of a parliamentary system which he strongly advocates throughout the book. Nonetheless, "The Frozen Republic" is a very insightful critique of the U.S. Constitution, and a plausible (although not complete) explanation for the current state of politics in the United States.

Anyone who complains about the author's left-wing views, which are obvious, is pretty much missing the point of the book. Left vs. right is only one axis, orthogonal to and in many ways less significant than older distinctions - Whig/Tory, Court/Country, federalist/parliamentary, etc. What, you say? Those are old issues, no longer relevant today? In fact they are as important today as ever, and are infrequently discussed in the modern United States because only one approach to them is allowed by the Holy Constitution...and that's precisely Lazare's point.

According to Lazare, the Constitution and the religious awe in which it is often held (even to the extent of my feeling compelled to capitalize the word) form the straitjacket in which our current looney-bin government and culture are confined. He seems to feel particular hatred for the amendment clause, but this brings us to the major flaw in this book. Despite his claim that the barriers to amendment are too high, Lazare himself discusses examples (e.g. Prohibition) that might lead one to the opposite conclusion. Likewise, though he favors a strong unicameral legislature, his commentary on the conduct of House members hardly support his own argument. In the end, much of the essential message of the book is muddied and lost.

Despite these flaws, though, this book provokes thought on a variety of matters not limited to the form of government. Of particular interest is the way Lazare discusses the relationships between abstract concepts such as separation of powers or individual rights to very concrete concerns such as public-health policy and urban sprawl. While his leftist tendencies do become annoyingly apparent in the later chapters, the attempt to tie everything together is laudable. Even if you disagree vehemently with all of Lazare's views, including the central thesis, the book is well worth reading in the spirit of broad intellectual exploration.

A book that needs to be read, if only for the shedding of light on Croatian history, which for too long was hidden or re- written by others. Putting aside his conclusions to the recent war, which seem to arose most criticism, he has written an even handed history of Croatia since early times, although sometimes he fails to place Croatia in its historical context, as a small nation in the greater general upheavals of Europe. Even so, Tanner has relied on many varied sources, not just myths created since the Second World War by both Western and East European historians, which many Western historians are now acknowledging as myths, half tuths or deceptions, of which Tanner is one.

Tanner is neither a Croatian nor an academic, and this limits the book in both understanding and the depth of its research. And yet, the book is successful all the same. It is a quick and accurate overview of Croatia's long and complicated history. Useful for those new to the region and its issues. Some of Tanner's conclusions (particularly those for the most recent events) are decidedly pro-Croat nationalist (unabashed support for Tudjman and the HDZ), and the still-important WW2 events are not carefully considered. But overall, it is a good, if simple book. You may want to complement it with Goldstein's history as well.

Anyone interested in going beyond the standard media sound byte to understand the history of Croatia, will find Tanner's book an invaluable resource. Tanner chronicles in detail the long history of the Croatian people and emergence of the Croatian state, including the birth and shaping of national identity, personalities, myths and changing political panorama. While most works on the subject deal with specific, disjointed time periods of Croatian history, Tanner provides an insightful and comprehensive account - complete with references and facts rarely found in other sources. An enlightening read about a surprisingly complex nation and its turbulent path through the historical landscape.

This book examines all aspects of the dispute between Macedonia and Greece ranging from ancient history to the present. John Shea analyzes such topics as the Greek government's refusal to recognize its large ethnic Macedonian minority, the Greek myth of ethnic purity, and the Republic of Macedonia's struggle for international recognition. This is yet another example of a non-Macedonian author being able to conduct research and come to his own conclusion that Greek claims about Macedonia simply are not valid. Highly recommended for people searching for a non-biased examination of Macedonia.

Thanks to the author many facts unknown to the wider audience related to Macedonia, its history and the Macedonians are finally revealed. The author takes trip back in time, 2000 years ago to start his book with the relations of Macedonia and Greece at that time. Mr. Shea goes through the centuries and unveils many things from the sad Macedonian history : supression, genocide and expulsion. The book concludes with the modern relations of Macedonia and its neighbors, as well as with the sad situation of the Macedonians in the neigboring countries. Must read book.

The greatest falsification of history is finnaly demystified.By reading this book,everybody can learn truth about glorious history of Macedonians and painfull aspects of their denial by Athens.Ancient Macedonians were not Greeks-it is adoption of certain Greek customs that was cherished by Hellenophilic historians as prove of their Greek belonging,but that is just as logical as saying that James Joyce was Greek because he is author of book named "Ullisius".Here,all important aspects of Macedonian History are blended into coherent and extremely well documentated essay-this book will leave speachless anybody who dares to falsify Macedonian history with its power of arguments.

After reading all the positive reviews for this book, I feel like maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. But I can't help thinking that somebody else contributed heavily to this book. It just doesn't feel like Griffin's dialogue. And who edited this book? Johnny Oliver and Jack Portet get mixed up, and I thought the version of the M16 used by Special Forces soldiers during that era was known as the CAR 15...(Griffin calls it a Car 16) As usual, Griffin has changed the story line from past books to make things fit into this story. (Take a close look with how he has played with Lowell's and Felter's pasts) And why can't Guevara actually be used in the story instead of being referred to in dozens of Top Secret messages? I don't know....I really like Griffin's Corps Series...and all the other Brotherhood books I thoroughly enjoyed...but this one was a struggle just to finish. But it's nice to see the characters brought back to life. I hope that if he does so again the story will flow a little more smoothly.

In 1964 the CIA reports revolutionary Che Guevara plans to replace Belgium influence in the area with Cuban control as a first step in making the continent a Cuban landmass. On the advice of Colonel Sanford Felter, Commander of the Top Secret Special Operations unit, President Johnson wants Che stopped, but not killed, preferring an image of a bungler not a martyr.

President Mobuto agrees to allow Felter's crack unit to complete the task of removing Che from the Republic of the Congo. With professionals like Lowell, Bellmon, Craig, Thomas, and new recruit Portet, the Americans succeed in their mission of kicking Che out of Africa. However, the versatile Che simply shifts continents to South America.

It has been a dozen years since W.E.B. Griffin released a "Brotherhood of War" novel. Fans of the series and newcomers will agree that the wait for SPECIAL OPS was well worth it as this novel is a tremendous military adventure. The men of the Special Forces seem like real people with everyday problems as well as dealing with a deadly mission. The story line rings true because of the numerous historical tidbits circa 1964 and the political involvement of various leaders in what the crack unit is authorized to do or not do. Mr. Griffin has triumphantly brought back a winner that will send many a reader searching for the previous eight novels (aside to Putnam: think reprints).

Harriet Klausner

This is one of the greatest Griffin books in years. So many readers lust for the action, but Griffin seems to remember that it's planning and waiting that makes an opertaion work.

The story moves along and the characters are really allowed to develop.

There is the standard romantic stuff that seems to be part and parcel of Griffin's work, as well as the idea that being an officer (or at least a Special Forces noncom) is really "where it's at", but that's part of the fun. Let's face it, the kind of stuff Griffin writes is not about the ordinary soldier. It would be boring writing if it were.

I wonder if he has any more stories like this left. I would be very interested to read them.