American Eagle Books

This book is a "must read" for anyone who has ever allowed fear to rule them. Life can be very intimidating, and this book allows you to view yourself from a totally new perspective. The beauty of this book is that the concept of Self Empowerment, though illustrated here through Native American teachings, is a basic truth of all cultures.
I heartily recommend this book, with the hope that it will help others in their quests, as much as it helped me.

Silver Eagles captures the real lives of Civil War soldiers. The tastes, smells, and essence of battle come to life through vivid descriptions. Korolev does an excellent job setting the natural scenes for the geographical areas in the story. The relationship between Colonel Ames and Lieutenant Colonel Chamberlain is manifested through the dialogue and it gives the reader a sense of the historical realities faced by the 20th Maine Regiment in 1862 and 1863. It is a good read.

William Johnstone died a few years ago and several writers took up the mantle to continue his beloved characters. I read them all and enjoy them, though the quality varies. None of them are bad, mind you, some just better than others,
I've only figured out who one of them is because I recognized the style and he's a favorite.
Falcon McAllister takes a job protecting a retired General's railroad he's planning to build to connect a small town. The smaller ranchers are for it, but oddly, the biggest is not and will use any means to stop it.
The book has the usual confrontations, two pairs of star-crossed lovers, and the ending took me completely by surprise. It didn't go where I was expecting it to.
Good for the author. Well worth the price for fans of westerns. A good buy.

Gibby's "Primitive clothing of the Native Americans" contains a lot of good 'how-to' info on making traditional and not-so-traditional buckskin garments. What differentiates this book from others is that it is not geared so much at replicators who want to make things exactly like they can be proven to have been made (museum quality replications), but more at regular folks who want to make buckskin clothing, and may or may not want to follow traditional styles.

Mr. Boyne has written a tight, fast paced flying novel with an historic integration that adds immeasurably to its believability. The action is nonstop and yet characterization is strong with a multitude of fictional and historical characters. I recommend this novel to anyone who likes action, avaition and a complex interplay between human beings. The only minor complaint I have is with the abruptness with which he completes several eposodes and situations.

In short, its a good read.

Mack and his 'former Texas Ranger' buddy, Wilson, are deep in Colombia taking on the NARC looking for Carlos Gomez-Garcia, or Pepe 89,. The number behind Carlos Gomez-Garcia (Pepe 89) in the drug cartel goes up everytime he kills using his machete. He never experiences a disposal problem, just drag the headless bodies out into the nearby jungle for the jaguars to feed on at night!

First they try to get kidnapped to make contact, then they kidnap a couple smaller fish in the underworld, to eventually reach a suitable level within the cartel they want. Using the middle man to eventually work their way to Pepe 89; he never moves up a number when a woman is his victim, women just don't count, you see. And if you find out his hidden escape route, as Michelle does, he just must kill her, cannot take the chance she will slip up and tell anyone else as to its location. But Juan knows some of the secret, but Pepe 89 is unaware that Juan knows, or Pepe 89 would have removed Juan from his head. Juan's knowledge will eventually be of aid to the Executioner and Wilson. Another familiar group bringing aid to Mack Bolan is Phoenix Force who appears here, too.

Through huge amounts of money, prostitutes, hit men, Columbian policia, car chases and shoot outs, the story races along, with some mighty interesting characters caught up in its path. One element that troubles the authorities is an insider within the government that can give warning to Pepe 89, allowing at least an hour for get away prior to the 'black helicopters' decending on his jungle abode. Through all the years, the authorities are just a little too late.

Though I've been reading these GOLD EAGLE books on and off for at least twenty years, the numerous writers engaged writing the books always keep them fresh and interesting. A long time contributor, Jerry VanCook, is the writer behind this book.

So, suspend your 'element of disbelief' to spend a few hazardous hours with our man, Mack Bolan, in Columbia. Live Large.

Semper Fi.

Much of the advancement of the science of aviation resulted from efforts to develop the airplane as a weapon of war but aside from the memoirs of some early "bird men" and biographies of a handful of other pioneer aviators little has been written about American aviation in the years before World War One. Considering the almost pathetic "state of the art" in this country prior to 1917-18 it is perhaps no surprise that the subject has received scant attention from historians, but virtually no attempts have been made to explain why the U.S was unable to exploit the technological breakthrough made by the Wright brothers. Wingless Eagle explores some of the social and political factors that affected American aviation in general and Army aviation in particular before the Great War.

Realistically, the government was the only potential buyer of those primitive flying machines in any sort of quantity, but neither Congress nor the General Staff was easily convinced that the benefits would be worth the cost. The young military and naval fliers who thought otherwise constantly struggled to demonstrate the value of aviation to the voting public but more often than not the hardware simply was not up to the task.

As the author (a law professor himself) discuses in some detail, one of the biggest obstacles was the Wrights themselves. Their bitterly contested-and expensive-patent infringement suits against Glenn Curtiss and others stunted the growth of the U.S. aircraft industry during its formative years. The author maintains that the Army overtly supported the Wright's position. Investors were justifiably leery, and without capital aircraft development stagnated.

Another legal episode, the 1915 court martial of Lt. Col. Lewis Goodier, is used to point out flaws in the Signal Corps management of the fledgling Air Service as well as to illustrate how personal jealousy among the flying fraternity and internal service rivalries also contributed to the sorry state of affairs in Army aviation. The author also makes an interesting assessment of what he terms the "aeronaut constituency", the various clubs and associations formed by enthusiastic-and often wealthy and influential-aviation boosters. Many other factors that aided or impeded the development of Army aviation are explored as well.

This is not a book about airplanes. (The caption on page 65 has the aviator at the controls of a "Wright Flyer", although he is grasping the steering wheel of what is clearly a Curtiss pusher.) Likewise, not much new light is shed on the operational aspects of Army aviation in those early years. The serious student of aviation history, however, will come away with a much better understanding of the complex military, political and personal interactions that determined the course of U.S. Army aviation through the end of the First World War.

Woman Spirit: A Menarche Myth Teaching and Celebrating Young Women Coming of Age is beautifully read by the author. This is a story of two friends about to reach this momentous stage of their lives. Woman Spirit explains what is happening to their bodies, hearts and minds and includes traditions from Native American cultures that help the girls plan meaningful coming-of-age ceremonies for themselves. This story will have meaning for all family members, but most especially for mothers, daughters, grandmothers and granddaughters. It moved me deeply.

we saved a ton over buying this book at the college book store. Thanks!!

I bought this book for a writing class and am glad that I got to read it. Hertsgaard makes many good points about America's role in the world. Thought there are some things that you will disagree about every thing gets you really thinking. Really take the time to read the book and it would even be better if you got someone else to read the book at the same time to talk about what is said in the book.

I can love my child, yet disagree with some of his behaviors. In the same way, I have lived internationally for much of my life, and there is always a tension between honoring my birthland, and acknowledging the mistakes in its foreign policy. Mr. Hertsgaard gives a brilliant, and frustrating look at how foreigners see the United States. If I go house to house in my small village in Europe, I could find hatred of the US, blind adoration of the US, and every flavor of opinion in between. The USA is hated because of its unopposed military and economic power. The USA is hated because not everyone in the world gets to move there and become wealthy and famous. The USA is loved because it is universally seen as a free country where anyone with motivation can become wildly successful in achieving their material dreams.
Mr. Hertsgaard expresses the same opinions, based on interviews in many places around the world. However, he tells only the sound-bytes of hate or love of the USA. Surveys of public opinion reflect media and informal network buzz, and this certainly is the way opinions about the USA change. In The Eagle's Shadow, world opinion showed pity after 9/11, and disgust after 2003.
I appreciated the attempt to show breadth and depth of opinions, and to balance statistical reporting with personal emotions of respondents. To balance this view of the US, I suggest reading "Why Europe will Run the 21st Century" by Mark Leonard.
Mr. Hertsgaard, what about writing a sequel to your book, along the theme of "Why America will Run the 21st Centure?"
Thanks for a great book. Below are a few of my favorite quotes:

--Friend or foe, rich or poor, foreigners tend to fear America for its awesome military power even as they are dazzled by its shimmering wealth.
--One can logically argue, as I would, that the United States in no way deserved the September 11 attacks ( there is never any excuse for terrorism, period) and the perpetrators absolutely should be brought to justice, while adding that the attacks cannot be understood, outside the context of American foreign policy and the resentment it has engendered.
--Uncomfortable truths don't go away just because powerful voices want them shouted down. Nor is dissent un-American; quite the opposite. IF one lesson of September 11 is that no nation is invulnerable in today's world, surely another is that America can no longer afford to ignore what the rest of the world things, even when--perhaps especially when--it is not laudatory.
--The United Sates had shot down an Iranian civilian jet it mistakenly believed was a military craft. All 290 passengers died. When Bush senior was asked if an apology was in order, he replied, "I will never apologize for the United States. I don't care what the facts are."

As a reader looking for an objective, international view of the United States and its role in the world, I was very disappointed with this book.

In a couple of places, Hertsgaard highlights some key issues and raises some good questions. But the bulk of the book is comprised of his own take on the U.S. and its problems, a view that is one-sided and highly biased, presenting a lot of debatable points as if they were "fact" and offering very little to do with international opinion.

Arguably, most foreigners don't even care about many of the domestic issues Hertsgaard's examines, such as racism and media bias, let alone understand them. Yet Hertsgaard's focus, ironically, is on what is important to America and Americans, rather than the international community.

I am a non-American, and like Hertsgaard, have traveled and lived in numerous countries around the world. In my experience, this book is not an educated, objective analysis of the U.S. from the outside as much as it is a rant from the inside by a frustrated American who thinks because he has travelled he has somehow gained perspective and insight into his own country. He clearly has not.

Suddenly, everyone is condemning America. Rock 'n Rollers, writers, artists, actors and actresses, foreign dignitaries. They're all pointing their finely manicured fingers at us "vulgar" Americans warning us about our "decadent" lifestyles and "hegemony." We're too fat, too materialistic, too self-centered, too violent, too pushy, they decry. And this, they insist, is why the world hates us. But first it warrants asking: are all theses stereotypes true? Are we Americans really that horrible? Where are the facts to prove it?

Leftist author Mark Hertsgaard in his book "The Eagle's Shadow: Why America Fascinates and Infuriates the World" doesn't attempt to answer these questions. Instead, his aim is to perpetuate the anti-American stereotype, to exonerate and explain away those who hate us. One of the most mind-boggling parts of Hertsgaard's book is when he attempts to extol African culture over American culture (which part of that vast continent he extols he does not make clear). The Africans, he insists, lead a far more relaxed, casual lifestyle than our own frenzied one. Americans are too greedy and pushy and violent. If only we could be more like the Africans, the world would love us, and peace would reign over the land.

Statistics show, however, that Americans are rather laid-back, moreso than even those precious Europeans. The Swiss, for example, are more concerned with time than the average American. And as far as being violent, once again statistics show that Americans are less violent than even the saintly Canadians. But the Left never allows for facts and figures to interfere with its arguments. So instead, Hertsgaard praises Africa's primitive ways, which, to him, are more idyllic. Once again ignoring data, he fails to acknowledge Africa's AIDS crisis, genocide, female mutilation, mass starvation, tyranny, ethnic warfare and average lifespan of about 46 years.

Leftists like Hertsgaard who bash America on all levels while praising the most war-torn, impoverished societies on earth make clear their intentions. The world, Hertsgaard argues, should not rest until America is brought down to its level. In Hertsgaard's religion of socialism, America is the devil, and anyone who hates the devil is level-headed and rational. If only we stupid Americans would wake up, and realize how much better off we'd be if we succumb to the world's hatred and allow ourselves to lead the lives of those innocent Africans, with their baskets on top their heads, quaint huts made of straw, and their machetes, tyrants, starvation, and early death...

Texans will hate this book, but it's probably closer to reality than other Alamo histories. A few real heroes survive the author's microscope, but many come across as bigoted fools. The author brings out from behind the historical curtain the real reason for the war -- the expansion of slavery. It's not a pretty picture, but still a fascinating one, and very well written. Reads like a thriller.

I loved this book. I disagree strongly with its overall tenor but, still, it is well-researched, well-written and presents many issues worhty of debate. I'm not going to debate them point by point [although I'd love to] but, it seems to me is that Long's biggest criticism of the Texas Revolution is that the revolutionaries were human beings. They weren't plaster saints. A few may have been mercenaries fighting entirely for land and loot rather than principle, but if such men actually existed, they were rare. The combatants--Anglo and Mexican-- were altogether human, with all the strengths, weaknesses and prejudices that characterized their age. Big surprise.

The motives of each man were as complex as humanity itself. Land, opportunity and wealth are ALWAYS issues for almost all of us but, in the case of the Texas ,there was also deep idealism and patriotism. Many of Long's "mercenaries" were no doubt men driven primarily by idealism. How else to describe the sacrifice at Alamo and other places?

Alamo was, and is, a glorious enigma. Long, to a certain extent, tries to dismiss it as military vainglory and blundering. It was a little of both but, at the end of the day, men [mercenaries?]made a decision to stand when they still had the opportunity to run. It was idealism run amok and hardly characteristic of mercenaries. At some point, before that final assault, each man knew that his reward wouldn't be land and wealth. His reward would be a bullet or bayonet.

Did men surrender? Almost certainly. More would have surrendered if they could. Life or death, during those final few seconds, was a product of the aggression of individual Mexican soldiers. With a bayonet at your throeat, you surrender. Period. Totally human and the defenders of Alamo, as courageous as they were, were HUMAN. A few, a very few of Santa Ana's soldiers, against orders, spared Texans, an error Santa Ana promptly corrected.

Santa Ana's defeat at San Jacinto, and the subsequent butchery, was the product of his own blundering and brutality. Almost every Texan there had lost friends and family at Goliad and Alamo. Every man in Houston's tiny force was howling mad with hatred and Generalissimo Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana carries the blame. Likewise, this flawed Caudillo carries much of the blame for problems between presentday Texas and Mexico. Santa Ana's slaughter, especially at Goliad. left a legacy of hatred fully exploited by Texas "Rangers" during the Mexican-American war which, like an ancient blood feud, has consequences to the present day.

The mere existence of Santa Ana, himself--the fact that he, in his cowardice, signed away Texas for his miserable life--should have been more than enough to cause his countrymen to lynch him. It wasn't. Santa Ana who was presidente and caudillo of Mexico many more years, mismanaged the Mexican-American war which resulted in the loss of half of Mexico. In my opinion, Santa Ana's continued survival and elevation demonstrates a major flaw in the Mexican political system, a fatal flaw that first arose during Cortes' brutal Conquest of Mexico and was nurtured by subsequent years of Spanish misrule.

Ron Braithwaite author of novels--"Skull Rack" and "Hummingbird God"--on the Spanish Conquest of Mexico

The book provides a nice in-depth overview of the origins of the conflict between the Mexicans and the Texans. The description of the conflict and the Alamo Battle itself, are also well done. Unfortunately, the revisionism is written from one of the most cynical perspectives I have ever read in my entire life, and detracts from the quality of the work. To the reader, it seems that author casts most every person in the History of this conflict as overly self-serving in their motives, and contemptuous of everyone else. Any source of human conflict -- even between the various races of people within the Mexican Army -- is amplified as overly divisive. One can forget any hint of Crockett, Bowie or Travis possessing even a scintilla of idealism or purity in motive. In fact, with little exception, hardly any person within the book seems to possess many mentionable good qualities, according to the author. Long seemingly strives to debunk the myths, but in my view he is too harsh in trying to eviscerate people's characters. If you are searching for a work which validates your most cynical view not only of the Alamo but of most of the entire human race, this book will not disappoint you.

Some revisionist points need to be made in the interest of the whole truth, but the author is one-sided to a fault. The book is glib, full of sweeping statements, a work of opinion and propaganda, not history.

In our time, people are so used to the idea of the U.S. as the great world power that they may have trouble in understanding that in the 1830s, on the world stage, the U.S. was a minor, upstart country with an uncertain future. Mexico, on the other hand, even after its disastrous War of Independence, was perceived as the heir apparent of the fabled wealth of New Spain. Hindsight is made out to be 20-20 vision, but it is not if it prevents one from understanding how things were and how they were perceived at the time. In this way, our knowledge of what was then the future can impede our understanding of the past.

I find Jeff Long's retelling of the Alamo fable refreshingly (if brutally) honest and well documented. He debunks alot of of the myths that surround the Battle of the Alamo. He is particarly good at providing an extensive background to the conflict. Growing up in Texas, and studying the state's History in the 4th and 7th grade, it was never too clear what the reasons behind the war were. All I was told is that a group of brave men stood fast against unsurmountable tyranny and sacrified their lives for the ultimate price of freedom. But to say that the Texas revolution was a war for independence is oversimplifying the issue... it is like saying the Civil War was just a war to end slavery. Now, some folks are fine with these simple definitions... and if you are the type of person that likes their history in neat little anecdotes and who wants their heroes to wear white and their villains to wear black, then this might not be the book for you. Reading through it the first time, I was sure that just as it opened my eyes it was going to get others very angry. Over the years, discussing this books with others that have read it has revealed this to be true.
There are many out there that feel this is book is biased and inflammatory. This could be true if Mr. Long was simply stating an opinion. But, the book is extremely well researched, and all his sources are listed for the world to see. If you don't think he is being fair in his assessment of the conflict, then look up the sources... he is not hiding anything. If it is biased, it certainly is not more so than the history books we were given to read at school. In fact, those books carried more of an agenda, and Mr. Longs account is far more accurate and even-handed.
Some legends are hard to die, and I am sure that regardless of how many books like this one are written some people will continue believing that Crockett died in a blaze of glory with his coonskin hat still on his head, and that Travis and Bowie were freedom loving martyrs that had no human fault. I applaud Mr. Longs for providing a well-researched alternative to this view, and for giving us an extensive background on the events and ideologies that lead to the conflict and the consequences that followed. If you are a real history buff that is interested in facts and who likes to get the larger picture, this book is definitely recommended. If not... then I suggest just sticking to John Wayne's 1960 melodrama for familiarity. It's available on DVD on this website as well, I'm sure.