This book is a breezy and very readable discussion of the Korean War and the political maneuverings of the combatants at the truce negotiations. Bailey's discussion of the talks makes them appear quite dynamic and productive until the introduction of the POW/Repatriation issue. This is the author's main focus and makes the book worth reading.

Article 118 of the 3rd Geneva Convention of 1949 states that POWs shall

BE RELEASED AND REPATRIATED WITHOUT DELAY AFTER CESSATION OF ACTIVE HOSTILITIES.

It was this position that suggested to some, such as Turner Joy, chief US negotiator the the talks, that the repatriation issue should not be on the agenda at the truce talks since a truce was exclusively an agreement to stop the fighting. Repatriation occurred after, not during, truce discussions. However, quoting from a British Gov't White Paper analyzing article 118, Bailey continues...

"THE LANGUAGE CANNOT MEAN MORE THAN IT ACTUALLY SAYS. THE TERM USED IS 'RELEASED AND REPATRIATED' AND THIS DOES NOT MEAN FORCIBLY REPATRIATED, WHICH WOULD BE FOREIGN TO THE WHOLE SPIRIT OF THE CONVENTION. IT WAS TRUE THAT THE CONFERENCE AT WHICH THE POW CONVENTION HAD BEEN ADOPTED...."

considered this possibility. But they felt it could only be a rare occurence. The Convention was intended to help POWs and ...

AS LONG AS OBJECTION TO REPATRIATION WAS GENUINE, THE RIGHT TO ASYLUM COULD BE HELD TO PREVAIL OVER THE NORMAL OBLIGATION TO REPATRIATE. "

Sorry for the legalese but Bailey's book is a good attempt to make clear the basis for the UN/US stand on refusing to repatriate unwilling Chinese and NKPA forces. Bailey suggests that in a conflict of rights--repatriation vs. asylum-- the latter is controlling.

Nonetheless it does not address Joy's primary objection: the purpose of the truce is just to stop the fighting No matter how uncomfortable or uncertain the post truce outcome on the POW issue might be, it had no business on the agenda as an item. The language in Article 118 is quite clear that repatriation--of ANY KIND-- does not occur until the hostilities have stopped. In short we put the cart before the horse. In the endless months the negotiations bogged down on this issue, countless casualties and deaths resulted. In a war with far more than its share of tragedies and arrogance on the part of both sides, this was perhaps the greatest.

While many people will read this book and use it as an analysis of the pros and cons of coalition warfare/coalition diplomacy, it is somewhat less than that. Before a country or an alliance can begin negotiations, it must have clearly stated objectives and a clear sense of what it feels is worth fighting for and what it feels is worth negotiating away. Thus in Desert Storm a military decision was reached not to go all the way to Baghdad, and we stuck to it. The Korean War, in contrast, is an example of pragmatism run amok: Truman discards years of JCS analysis that 'Korea isn't strategically important to the US.' Along the way he tramples congress' exclusive right to declare war. Acheson abandons his own claim six months before that 'Korea is outside the US Sphere of influence.' MacArthur says the NKPA will run from the sight of Americans, then suddenly he needs every soldier in the Far East. First we won't cross the parallel..then its up to the UN, then its up to MacArthur, then we're in deep doo-doo (as a latter day pragmatist president might say, in his own little undeclared venture) 200 miles inside enemy territory.

I remember once hearing a Korean War vet say he left to ragtime and came home to rock'n roll. Of course the real tragedy is that 35,000 never came home at all. Within a decade another war, again undeclared, ultimately to claim 56,000. The real danger of coalition warfare, and fighting under the UN umbrella, is that it provides the Chief Executive with political cover so he can avoid seeking congressional approval. Dangerous...very very dangerous. Those who distrust coalition warfare and placing US forces under a UN flag are not neo-isolationist radicals. They simply ask that a President who feels the blood of American men (and women) is worth the dignity of a Congressional Declaration of War.

Law Never Here is an interesting book, and, as the authors say, certainly timely considering recent developments with relation to African Americans and law enforcement. However, as a historian, I was left wanting more from Bailey and Green.

The book's biggest flaw is its heavy dependence on the scholarship of other historians. It covers too broad of a time period, and as a result, Bailey and Green the criminologists are forced to rely on historians for any infomation. They quote other historians almost verbatum in early chapters. This detracts from their overall work, because they rely on other historians to deliver their own message. Anything before 1900 is exceptionally weak.

The author's arguments for twentieth century are strong, however. Here, I believe their criminology background serves them well, and gives a different perspective than one would get from a historian or sociologist, for example. The authors deserve credit for trying to fit events like Attica, Rodney King, and O.J. Simpson into a larger framework. These are events too recent for even modern historians to touch, and Bailey and Green handle them well.

I can't fully recommend this book because of the mentioned flaws, but it might be worthwhile just for the authors' analysis of recent events. I'd recommend Harvard historian Randall Kennedy's "Race, Crime, and Law" over this book.

I just recently caterered my husband's 30th birthday party with a Scottish theme. I found "A Little Scottish Cookbook" to have well laid out traditional recipes that were easy to prepare. However, after buying a few other cookbooks on the subject at the time, it's pretty standard. If you're looking for the standard bill of fare in Scottish recipes this is it.

New Testament Explorer does an excellent job of mapping out the arguments of all the New Testament books. The sections which survey each book's contents are considerably more detailed than most survey books. However, the outlines are much more brief and general in comparison to the detail of the surveys. Some outlines are so general, they do not seem capture the distinctives of the Bible book. Also, the book deals very lightly with introductory matters (authorship, date, historical and cultural background). So if your desire a expedition through the content of the New Testament books themselves, New Testament Explorer is a wonderful guide. Just don't expect many extra excursions.

Join Petula for a day in her playful world, and prepare to see the world from a whole new perspective! Be swept away with the comical illustrations, explore the peculiar world of Petula, and laugh as she creates an elaborate and delightful game for all to enjoy.

The story is told in a way that almost demands to be read aloud, the language is rhythmic, filled with vivid descripitions and dialogue that evokes the setting and experiences of the characters. "It's time now to dance. I'm wearing my silver and green dancing pants. I can float like a cloud. I'm as light as the air. When I jump over here, I land way over there. I can hang upside down by my toes from this tree. So I just don't have time for a bath. Can't you see?"

At some point, the reader becomes lost in the game, lost in the world of the story, where Petula has vegetables growing out of her hair and greedy neighbours literally snapping at her heels! This book offers a humorous look at the 'dirty side' of life, which most young children would giggle themselves grotty at. Let's face it, where there is a child, there is usually grot... (and I mean that in the nicest possible way!)

Although an O.K. book to give to young girls about some successful women, the title leads the buyer to believe it is a worldwide overview. The women mentioned are from the U.S., thus Marie Curie, winner of 2 Nobel Prizes (one in Chemistry, one in Physics), is not mentioned. Mary Leakey is not mentioned as a leading anthropologist. No American meteorologist is mentioned, although several are quite famous, including Joanne Simpson.

As can be seen, I have rated this a three-star book. The main reasons for this are the repetitious use of source material (a dialogue by Hemingway used twice in its entirety, plus the same quote from Flannery O'Connor rehashed only two pages apart), as well as the inexcusable number of typographical errors that mar a good many pages. One especially glaring example includes the two missed-out words ironically from the page on "Polishing", where we read:

A good essay to read on "Publishers and Publishing" is by C. Michael Curtis, Senior Editor of The Atlantic Monthly, where for the past twenty years or so he been [sic] largely responsible for almost of [sic] the fiction the magazine has published.

Others include, but are not limited to:
p. 39 cush instead of such
p. 65 hallowing instead of hollowing
p. 68 intellecutally [sic];afterall [sic]
p. 83 packets instead of pockets

Apart from these errors, the book has much for the beginning writer, which I still am after 12 years of writing short stories. The first few sections on Significant Detail, Character, Point of View and Power of the Plot were all very strong, even if not entirely new to me. However, despite Tom Bailey's many admirable touches (you can tell he is a gifted writing teacher from his unstinting generosity and profusion of examples), the glut of the material seems to have come from other sources, notably Gardner's 'Art of Fiction', Raymond Carver's 'Fires', and Flannery O'Connor's 'Writing Short Stories'.

The book's main strength is that it has introduced me to a much wider variety of writers, and given me enough ideas for the mother of all wish lists. Lastly, Tom Bailey's story at the end, 'Snow Dreams', went a long way in making me forget the score of pesky but debilitating errors on many of the other pages.

You can probably find no more colorful soldiers than those representing the Confederacy from Texas. Ms. Bailey presents an interesting overview of these individuals, often overlooked as they were confined to the obscure Trans-Mississippi department. The presentation of this material, however, seemed to be somewhat disjointed with much content seeming to repeat rather often. I felt that there was so much more to learn about these intriguing and colorful individuals that could have been more thoroughly investigated, even given the restrictive limitations of this introductory overview. Furthermore, a few inaccuracies exist, such as with the illustration presented for David Dixon Porter, which in reality is actually a picture of his brother, William D. "Dirty" Dixon. Being confused for his brother would have created much consternation to David Dixon, as William Dixon was often a source of great anxiety and concern for the Dixon family. Nonetheless, for a quick review of Texan Cavalry participation in the Civil War, especially that of the Trans-Mississippi Confederacy, this title serves satisfactorily as a basic beginning point, prior to more in-depth examinations.

This is a short review, as it is a short book. "What is My Dog Thinking" is a satisfactory overview of various canine behaviors and their meanings. This overview is as good as any other I've seen, but it didn't offer much that I haven't read elsewhere. Also disappointing was its lack of instruction on how to address certain dog "feelings" - for example, if I can interpret that my dog is fearful, what are some basic ways that I can help my dog deal with this fear?

That said, for its price and the time it takes to read it and occasionally refer back to it, it probably is a worthwhile purchase for a dog owner or prospective dog owner, even if it is somewhat lacking.

Lori is an interesting and funny speaker and she brings much of that "spark" into this book. She writes a practical book and both the need for accountability in ministry as well as helping to show how to set up circles of accountability. She uses her own real life examples to demonstrate what she is teaching. A good book both for those new to the ministry as well as the veterans.