Martin Sherman, Despots, Democrats and the Determinants of International Conflict (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998, 230pp., ...

Recognized that, in the 20th century alone, the world witnessed at least three ideological clashes between (liberal) democracy and despotism -namely, national socialism, Soviet bolshevism and religious fundamentalism-, the question 'whether the internal regime of a state is the determinant factor in its external behaviour becomes very significant. This book tries to answer this question by investigeting the relationship between the structural features of a state's internal regime on the one hand, and its external behaviour in the international system on the other.

After an impressive foreword by Shabtai Shavit, the former head of Israel's 'Mossad'; there comes an introduction part which clearly outlines the book's contents and objectives. The book consists of three main parts. Part I involves a theoretical effort of model-building, in which the author constructs two models: 'an ideal democracy' and 'an ideal dictatorship', based on the some virtually universally accepted assumptions regarding the features of these regime types. Part II is devoted to the design of an empirical test in order to evaluate the validity of the theory, when applied to the real world. The author employs two ways to investigate the empirical validity of the theoretical predictions: 'justification' (finding evidences confirming the predictions) and 'falsification' (subjecting the theory to efforts to repudiate it). In Part III, M. Sherman tries to combine the theoretical and empirical elements of the first two parts in order to use the findings of the book not only as a guideline for the formulation of future policy decisions, but also as a medium for the evaluation of past.

Throughout the book, Martin Sherman aims at constructing a 'model'. This attempt for model building can, and must, be criticized in terms of both the way in which it is constructed and its assumptions. First of all, the author not only employs hypothetical elements of the microeconomic theory (consumer choice, market structure etc.), but also he develops his study under strict ceteris paribus conditions. Moreover, while examining the significance of the findings for policy formulation, the author uses 'rational model of decision making', which is chiefly based on the use of the hypothetical notion of 'utility' (an imaginary concept!) and its derivatives. Since it is a matter of debate whether both the microeconomic theory and rational model can be employed to describe, or explain, the full complexity of actual decision-making conditions, or not; the validity of a theory based on these two is questionable. The second shortcoming of the model may be its assumptions. The author's model assumes the international system as an anarchical structure in which each state has an objective function of increasing, or at least preserving, their relative power vis-à-vis other states in the system. He writes: 'it will be assumed throughout that all the states in the international system are post-imperialist nation states, ...' (p.29, emphasis in original). Also, he assumes the existence of a 'social contract', which means a reciprocity of obligation between ruler and the ruled. Moreover, as can be understood from the title -'Despots, Democrats and the Determinants of International Conflict'-, the author confines the focus of the study to conflictual situations in which there is a clash of interests. In addition to all these, only political factors are taken into account in the study. However, when we think of the existence of the international regulatory organizations, the dictators who do not care about his citizens, the cooperative situations in which the interests of states coincide and, especially, such non-political factors as those related with economics, sociology and culture; all these assumptions may seem less promising.

The author's writing style is quite clear; however, there are lots of such non-English terms as 'bona fide' (p.132), 'ex-ante' (p.114), 'modus operandi' (p.125), 'quid pro quo' (p.127), and so on. Another deficit in the writing style is the use of microeconomic concepts. Although, throughout the book, the author very often employs microeconomic concepts (eg. decision-maker utility curve, convexity, maximax etc.), he does not explain what they mean. He writes: 'I shall assume that the reader is familiar with these details.' (p.152). Both the non-English terms and the use of microeconomic concepts make the understanding of some parts difficult, if not impossible.

Martin Sherman concludes the book with a short review. Sherman emphasizes " ... rather than a 'security dilemma' ... the existence of a 'security paradox', whereby international stability is best preserved by 'status quo' states developing the means to violate it." (p.194, emphasis in original). Though the author's assumptions limit the scope (or, even, the validity) of the model, it may be a good read for those who want to learn the general characteristics of democracies and dictatorships, and at the same time, who are familiar with concepts of the microeconomic theory.

Erkan ERDOGDU

The author is highly aknowleged in academic cyrcles for his uncompromised views which usually do not "fit" into Israely political scientists' mainstream. Nevertheless, his views are always based on a solid systematic logical structure - a property not so widely existant in academy as one might suppose. This book is highly awaited among author's students and collegues.It is the conclusion of various studies by the author in the political science field. I shall not ruin the reading experience by uncovering the books' main thesis. Enjoy !

This book is pretty much word for word from RFC 2002. Instead of buying this book you should just grab the rfc for free.

Despite several years of involvement with Mobile IP as an implementor, and having personally helped to develop it into a standard, I managed to see new things when viewing the details from Charlie's point of view. His ability to present the overviews required to bring the reader through the technology, and from chapter to chapter is logical and clear. At the same time, Charlie provides the reader with suitable references both to other locations within his book, as well as from external sources for later reference. I have experienced first hand Charlie's significant contributions to the Mobile IP standard in both theory, and practice by more than good example. His contribution to Mobile IP, and to the rest of the world in the form of this book should not be overlooked by anyone from the administrator considering utilizing Mobile IP, to the graduate student wishing to understand it.

William T. Sherman seems to have a biography written of him every three years or so. There are currently four bios available, not to mention his own memoirs and more venerable books such as the volumes by Liddell Hart and Lloyd Lewis. He's an endlessly fascinating character, multi-faceted, complex, and as amazingly verbose. He had an opinion on most everything, and to use my wife's phrase, "never had an unuttered thought." Because of this he's great biography material, and historians have been interested in him a great deal as a result.

Those recent bios vary greatly in their treatment of their subject. John Marszalek's Sherman: A Soldier's Passion For Order is the culmination of that man's life, seemingly. Marszalek lived with Sherman for a great while, to the extent of naming a dog Cumpy (Sherman's childhood nickname), and it showed in that the book is still the longest and most exhaustive biography. He sees Sherman as a twisted soul, tormented by his inability to control the world around him, but able to deal with things once he gets in command of an army and is able to influence events to an extent. Michael Fellman's Citizen Sherman is more harsh and unforgiving. Fellman is a Canadian historian who looks at the American Civil War through relentlessly modern lenses, and sees racism, misogyny, elitism, and various other ills pretty much everywhere in 19th century America. He doesn't think much of Sherman. Stanley Hirshson's The White Tecumseh, on the other hand, is apparently a very forgiving portrait of what the author considers a great soldier (this is the one Sherman bio I haven't read). The author of the present book, Lee Kennett, falls somewhere between Marszalek and Hirshson. He handles Sherman pretty mildly, though he does make note of his foibles and prejudices (as expressed in things he wrote) in passing.

Most biographers of Sherman note that he wanted to be judged as a soldier, and then dutifully tell you that they will abide by his wishes. Kennett follows suit, but only sort of succeeds. Instead his book is largely a study of Sherman's personality, with a whole chapter devoted to this subject on the eve of the Civil War. The book is remarkably spare in terms of narratives of the actual battles themselves: instead there's a great deal of space devoted to the politics of the army 1861-1865. So the Meridian raid gets about a paragraph, and the battles around Atlanta are disposed of in a page or so.

The author also leaves things out, things that make it into some Sherman biographies. Perhaps the best-known anecdote is Joe Johnston killing himself by standing bareheaded at Sherman's funeral, and catching pneumonia. It's not here, and there are a number of other things that didn't make the book either. I know this is a short biography, but somehow I expected some of these things to make the book.

Several previous reviewers put this forward as an introductory biography of Sherman. One thing the book definitely is is neutral on the subject. Until now, the one neutral book was Marszalek, the longest, so I suppose this one, at half the length, is better. I don't consider a 352 page book an introduction to anything, however, and I can't say I agree here. Introductory books are 200 pages or so.

That being said, this isn't a bad book, and I can't come up with any reason to review it negatively. It's just not a particularly good one either.

Over the last few years several outstanding biographies have been written. Biographies that delve deep into their subject and bring that person and their entire family to life. This is not one of those books. This is not to say that Lee Kennett has produced a bad biography, just a biography that pales in comparison to some other works. Simply put, it is impossible to do a complete biography on a man as complex as William T. Sherman in a scant 353 pages. To write a reasonably detailed account of the, "Great March" alone would have taken more space than this whole book.

What Kennett has produced is a good quick scan of the General's life. The details of his campaigns and many other facets of his life have been left for others. As an example, he covers the battles around Atlanta in about two pages. Not much in the way of detail will be found on any of the battles that Sherman was involved in for the author has instead tried to deal with the personality traits that made Sherman into Sherman. Unfortunately, the search for Sherman the inner man is not all that successful. The author does make some interesting points but he never seems to really get into the soul of his subject. It would indeed be interesting if someone could really get into the soul of the man who devastated so much of the south and then turned around and attempted to give back to the south all it was about to lose.

On the whole, I found this an interesting book. It is the first time I have read about General Sherman in any detail, and I'm sure that those who have studied the General before will find this book lacking. However, for someone not very aquatinted with Sherman this is a fairly good book. I never quite felt that I knew, "Cump" but I did begin to feel as if I would like to know much more about him. That in itself is an accomplishment for Mr. Kennett for I, like many other sons of the south, was raised to detest that foul Yankee firebug.

If you want a good solid exciting biography of Sherman - this is your book. I'm tired of reading bloated biographies of
say 1000 pages. This book has a nice quick pace. Sherman would have liked that. It gives adequate coverage to Sherman's military and personal life as well as a nice perspective on his historical legacy.

Dan Sherman's 'Above Black: Project Preserve Destiny' is one of the most compelling UFO books I have read. Told in a straight, matter of fact tone, Sherman recounts his recruitment and training by the Air Force to communicate 'intuitively' with an alien species. According to Sherman his story begins in the early 60's with the abduction of his mother and his own subsequent genetic manipulation to foster is unique communication abilities. Subsequent to his entry into the Air Force, Sherman eventually is recruited into AF Intelligence. While stationed at the National Security Agency to attend an electronic warfare course, Sherman is also trained secretly to invoke his 'Intuitive Communicator' (IC) abilities and understand the associated protocols. Following his training, the book on one level recounts his AF postings, his communications with aliens and the knowledge they impair. On another, the book documents his increasing ill ease and frustration of being part a sinister! Government program that lies to its people about an impending Armageddon and it's complicity in the abduction of citizens it's worn to protect. As a UFO investigator of sorts, I have checked many of Sherman's claims and have verified the veracity of each one. My only critique is that Dan writing will not be confused with a great stylist.

If you're expecting a mind-altering, Strieber-esque tour of the alien psyche, this book won't do it for you. It will, however, kidnap you, test your faith in the myth of an unchallenged national security system, lock you in a guarded underground bunker with nothing but a blank computer screen in front of you, and leave you -- not as alone as you wish -- all in the space of a long evening's read.

A former USAF tech/soldier, Sherman writes in a hybrid military report style, laced with imaginative acronyms which could only come from the stolid minds of agents at the highest NSA security levels. But it's his "only the facts" style that evokes a gut-level belief in what he's talking about, the mundane description of security measures, the first-person accounts of information given by his supervisors, the midnight "comms" with unseen aliens. He speculates little as to the alien's agenda, he draws no concrete conclusions, and he unmercifully leaves us with our imagination running akimbo on many of the issues.

Sherman's Above Black is uncompromising, revealing, and disturbing -- Extreme Reading.

Never trust a critic you don't meet in person, as they could have ulterior motives. The book is great. I read close to 20 books monthly and one sure way to decipher someones' integrity is by viewing their written word. If its as exciting as "Harry Potter", its probably fiction. Sherman is not a good fabricator, the book is bland, and it reads like a student essay that they had to do whether they enjoyed it or not. At the end of the book, the man requests that anyone who has shared similar experiences contact him, as he HAS NO IDEA what the purpose was for his involvement, and its obviously important for him to find out. He's not looking for a bestseller, he's looking for answers about what happened to him and is hoping somebody out there will answer his "preverbial 'want ad". READ IT.

This text is absolutely inadequate in the gastrointestinal physiology area for the level it proposes to teach. They really need to get someone who understands this area to help them out.

The book is an easy read enough for an introductory text, but the details for many chapters are really inadequate.

I found this book to be invaluable for learning physiology. It was in-depth and has excellent illustrations. A must-have for the physiology student.

I love good military sci-fi as much as the next starship trooper, but this isn't it. Part of my problem may stem from the fact that I started with this book in the series and there are many parts that I found difficult since I had no prior knowledge of what had happened in the first 4 books. But my real problem came from the style of the writing and characterizations. I thought that the people were more like cut-outs borrowed from "Tour of Duty" than real characters. None of them really resonated. The alien species were particularly humerous in how far I had to suspend my disbelief to accept them. The constant changes in the time-frame of the narration made it very hard to know what was supposed to be happening before what. Add to that the constant political lectures and the book quickly lost my attention. I found the diatribe about the evils of the Japanese and their empires particulrly disturbing in a book written after the 1950's. While the marines were interesting in potential, and the story about the evils of interfereing with indiginous cultures well taken, I fear that I will not be reading another book in this series.

Fans of rough and tumble action should look elsewhere. The back of the book says "the toughest fighters in Human Space confront their fiercest battle." which is stretching things quite a bit. Basically out of 346 pages there is a 6 page fight with the aliens (who use clubs and 22-caliber rifles!) and a 13 page assault on a spaceship. The whole spaceship sequence was really a dissapointment as the setup was great: a desperate band of pirates, a heavily modified ship with unknown defenses, but with the exception of the bridge the whole ship was taken in 4 pages - and this is most of the big climax to the book!

Obviously the focus of this book in the series is not on combat. It is much more about the characters and the aliens, who are well fleshed out and believable. I tend to prefer action stories which may be why I am harsh on this one, but I also like happy endings with the good guys winning..which makes this one tough for me...I'm trying not to give away too much here, and although it may be more realistic, the whole ending wasn't satisfying to me. The issue with the scientists never was resolved, the issue with Captain Coronado wasn't resolved to my satisfaction and the issue with Corporal Doyle - a very interesting character sure didn't sit well with me...but then I prefer Disney'ish happy endings..so take what I say with a grain of salt.

With all that you may think I didn't like it at all.. not the case, it was a good read, just slower than others, and a lot more info about the universe around the marines, the government, the lives of the pirates and especially the aliens. It wasalso cool that it was specifically a believable sequel to Book 4, with everyone still wandering around wondering about the aliens in that book.

But my interest is primarily action and fighting with cool futuristic weapons. I want my heroes down on the ground slugging it out with the bad guys. Here the Marines don't arrive at the planet until page 148 and really, the whole problem could have been resolved with a couple of knock-out gas bombs - which I would imagine the 25th century Marines have. I'm hoping the next book in the series will have more action....

My hat's off to co-authors Dan Cragg and David Sherman for not taking the easy path. This series has been building an ever-greater following, and the thing most authors would have done would have been to stay in the groove and keep re-writing the same book over and over again. With volume V, Cragg and Sherman have certainly kept the basic themes and characters, but they've also taken chances by pushing the envelope and reaching (successfully, in my book) for ever-greater creativity. I found the picture of the alien world the most intriguing I've read in many years--it took me back to my youth and the great age of sci-fi, with writers like Heinlein, Asimov and Company. Other reviewers have gone over the basics of the plot, so I'll keep this short and not re-hash it. But this book revitalized my interest in the series--because there's more to life and conflict than just raw combat, even in a troubled, war-torn future--and because it is, in this reader's view, a marvelous work of the imagination. I hope the series continues for many more volumes, and I suspect the audience will continue to grow. In the meantime, I just passed this volume to my brother, who also remembers the golden age of fictional speculation. Very well done!

I bought the book in the hopes of getting a good story about Methos in Ancient Egypt, but instead all I found was a typical story suited to a romance novel and not to an adventure in the Highlander universe. The ending and the discovery of Methos' immortality and the reaction of the Egyptian was trite, simplistic and shows a horrible lack of orginality. The book also managed to work in the typical 'kill the woman he loves so there'll be no hindrance and he can have more adventures' (This was used in countless James Bond movies). The Macleod/Methos relationship was also one dimensional. Macleod does the boyscout routine and Methos does his 'Do nothing and leave' routine. There is no true interaction between the two and they are left as cardboard cutouts. Ms Sherman could have done so much more.

A random trip to a museum leads Methos down memory lane to a time in ancient Egypt. In 1500's B.C. Methos travels to Egypt only to discover it is being occupied by a brutal race known as the Hyksos. Methos decides to get the hell out of dodge but he's unwittingly drawn into the fight to rid Egypt of Hyksos rule. His task becomes even more perilous because a Hyksos prince turns out to be an immortal, and a completely insane one at that. Meanwhile, back in present day New York, Methos and Duncan suspect that a killing spree is tied to Methos' past.

This really is a three star book but since I lust after Methos it gets four. The plot isn't really anything special but is interesting enough to keep you reading, even though it's pretty predictable. Methos and Duncan were well written and in character but many of the secondary characters were one dimensional. The writing overall is adequate but the author's tendency to repeat herself and state the obvious got on my nerves after a while. Methos fans will enjoy this book but if you aren't that interested in him, skip it.

I wasn't expecting much from "The Captive Soul", after having read some bad reviews on it, but what a good surprise I had when I managed to read the book; although part of it is a little disappointing, indeed, I very much liked it. The action in the past is an interesting and thrilling trip into Methos' past -- any fan of the ROG can have a lot of fun reading how Methos helped the Egyptians to get rid of their evil overlords, the Hyksos, and, in the meantime, fell in love with a slave who he refused to name "like a pet". Both stories get along well and have a very unexpected ending. Besides, in ancient Egypt, we can enjoy (and imagine) several scenarios and situations Methos is in. His thoughts as well as his actions are believable, sometimes reminding you the "good Dr. Adams". However, the action in the present leaves a lot to be desired. Methos and MacLeod don't have much interaction -- they just keep walking from a place to another, chit-chatting, and suddenly the story is over. The final sword fight is not that good and Josepha Sherman even forgets to tell us what happened with a character (Professor Maxwell), who was around at the beginning of the last "scene" and then, disappears without any further explanation. There also is the issue concerning the time (1573-1570 B.C.) Sherman placed her story: one can remember that Methos was a very bad guy in the "Bronze Age" and it would be very unlikely that, at this time, he would be willing to help anyone but himself, or be kind and lovely towards his women. Well, one can either take in consideration that the Bronze Age occurred in different times in different regions of the world (and the Methos of the book is a post-blue-faced Methos)... or forget it and enjoy the story. And yet, the book hasn't been ruined (in my opinion, at least) -- as a Methos' fan, I really loved to "see" him in this adventure in ancient Egypt, being the old good Methos we all love.

I've been running for about 18 years and always wondered if I was doing it properly or getting the most out of it. I could never find a book, other than training for a marathon, to help me. Salazar's training book was very motivational. I knew I fell into the "runners" category; I've incorporated it into my life so that I don't even have to think about working out. It's just a part of my routine every other day. It was interesting to read about the stages a runner goes through, i.e. from beginner, to jogger, to competitor, to athlete and then finally runner. I'm incorporating his stretching exercises and now realize their importance in warding off injury. Also reassuring was the issue about weight and what the scale says. Time to ignore the number! A very helpful book.

I found this book to be ideal for my whole family. From my father and mother who will appreciate the stretching, walking and nutrition chapters, to myself who likes to sprint and run, the book has something for everyone. Though I have never run a marathon (though I have run a 1/2 marathon), if I do, I will use this book.

I use the treadmill for interval training and have already seen improvements in my speed and endurance.

An easy to read and follow program of exercise and training for all levels. I especially appreciated the innovative stretching routines and running/walking workouts.

I have a treadmill at my office and thanks to this book I have a greater appreciation of it's strengths as an exercise and conditioning tool.

Horrible depiction of New Orleans and Mardi Gras. Inaccurate dates, chronology and grammer. Read RANSOMS Review. It sums it up. Please don't waste your money or time on this book.

As an avid reader and lover of Louisiana literature and culture, I found this book to be less about Mardi Gras then it is about a simplistic, self indulgent male view of life and women. Poorly written with endless repetitive dialogue and sentences, the reader can easily skip several pages at a time without ever missing the point of the story if there is one. Are we really supposed to want to read over 500 pages of a superificial lawyer in his thirties rationalizing leaving his wife, child, friends and job for drugs and an equally superficial sex and drug-crazed bimbo. This is the first time in my life that I've thrown away a book in disgust. If you really want to know about Mardi Gras, check out National Geographic - they at least will spare you the bad prose and the sanctimonius dribble!

I enjoyed Return to Mardi Gras. I think it does a very good job of telling everything about Mardi Gras. It not only tells about Mardi Gras in the French Quarter, which is what everyone sees on television. It also tells how it is celebrated in the neighborhood by the local people, which is very family oriented. It also does a good job of describing the quaint French Quarter scenery, as well as telling the history of New Orleans.

I live in New Orleans, and whenever people from out of town ask me what Mardi Gras is like, I give them a copy of Return to Mardi Gras, since it describes Mardi Gras far better than I can, and they see a true picture of Mardi Gras.

It is an interesting story about the romance between a conservative attorney and his young uninhibited mistress who lives in the French Quarter, when he moves in with her. It is amusing how they try to work out their different lifestyles, against the backdrop of the French Quarter and Mardi Gras.

I highly recommend this book for anyone wanting to find out what Mardi Gras is really like.

Where I can I begin? It was boring, it dragged the story on, and I don't know why half the people were in the story. It was very confusing. I almost didn't finish the book because it was that boring. This is the only Buffy book that I would recommend that people shouldn't read.

I've read every Buffy book up to this point. Both the adult and YA ones. And this one.....I don't know. It contained a very slow and developing plot. I couldn't even finish. I only got halfway through. I honestly thought it would and even could be tons better. Hmm. Very disappointing. I think Chris Golden and Nancy Holder have everything down more and it comes easier to them. Their books are the best. :) But this one. I mean I thought the ST's (student teachers) were there to cause evil to happen, but it seemed they were only connected to the monster by way of mere stalking. Kind of typical. From the parts I read, it was okay though......

I quite liked this book.It was good character wise but the plot was so thin.This was my first BtVS book and as it wasnt that good i decided not to read them and then my mum bought me power of persuasion and that was good!But the buffy books never really explore the characters like this book did.And i think the plot could of been better i mean Ethan Rayne good villian on the show but on this book not good he just walked about i mean how boring! the student teachers what was the point in that?! I would recommend this book if you are a die hard buffy fan(like me) but in case ure not that then dont buy this.