Sometimes I wonder who pays for these extended ads for suffering with your problems instead of having a hysterectomy. I don't doubt that there are a few women who have hysterecetomies recommended to them who could do OK without. Just like there are people who start a business in their garage and make it into the Fortune 500. But the *majority* of women who are having awful periods, terrible pain, hurt like hell every time they have ..., and so on are well rid of their uterus. Having a hysterectomy was the best thing I ever did. Even ... is 100 times better! So who's promoting these scare-stories? The only people who gain from women suffering needlessly are the insurance companies who can pay their execs a few more figures with our "health" dollars! What **MAN** would put up with bleeding every month and constant/unpredictable pain from an organ he was no longer interested in using?

at the reaction of the Arlington, Texas reader who went out of her way to attack this book because she believes hystectomies benefit women. Her own experience may have been positive, but why would she want to deprive the other million-plus American women who are advised to have a hysterectomy each year--a proportion greater than in virtually any other country in the world--of the chance to make an informed decision, based on full knowledge of the options? Thank God, there are new options today; as well as a growing sense of responsibility among doctors to avoid unnecessary surgeries that for some may prove emotionally and physically damaging. The new edition (April 2001) of this book offers an excellent overview of the new treatments, as well as the latest thinking about their risks and benefits. But more importantly, this book is evenhanded--never pushing the reader but rather simply laying out the pros and cons of hysterectomy (and oophrectomy, another tough question) in a warmly accessible way, so that she can draw her own conclusions. It is an uplifting, wise, and comprehensive guide that can help any woman make the treatment decision that is right for her. Every gynecologist should have a copy of this book on display in the waiting room!

This book is necessary for any woman who is faced with the decision of whether to go forward with a hysterectomy. Dr. Strausz articulates, clearly, what is and is not at stake. An empowering,life-affirming book.

This day-to-day diary of the confusion and fears that confronted those who lived through Russia's revolutions and their aftermaths in 1917-19 is well worth reading. However, it has its frustrations, especially a) the unremitting tone of hauteur by this right-wing, upper class novelist when confronted by the ascendant working class, and b) the editor's feeling that every rumor reported by Bunin, no matter how outlandish (St. Petersburg has fallen to the Germans; "The Red Army has been chased from Russia") requires his footnote assuring us that "The rumor was not true". Although both are very different in focus from this book, I much preferred Bulgakov's The White Guard, an autobiographically fictional account of his life during the same time period, with the same confusion, in Kiev, and Sukhanov's The Russian Revolution, 1917, an almost hour-by-hour description of the actual government takeovers in 1917.

The previous customer review refers haughtily to the "hauteur" of Ivan Bunin, a "right-wing, upper class novelist." Say what? Bunin, a master of Russian prose, was understandably aghast as he watched the sudden, violent and senseless destruction of the glorious Russian culture. The reviewer sneers that "the folk, in Bunin's opinion, were ignorant, gullible, violent, dirty, and totally unfit to take a hand in government." Well, it sounds like Bunin got it just about right! Just look what the left-wing thugs ruling in the name of "the folk" did to Russia for the next 70 years.

Strangely, Soviet leaders decided that "Cursed Days" was unsuitable for consumption by "the folk." Hmmm... Talk about hauteur! Only in recent years was the publication of this amazing diary permitted in Bunin's homeland, and now - thanks to Thomas Gaiton Marullo's splendid translation - English-speaking readers can finally see that there were some people who weren't fooled in 1917. I just hope that modern readers will read Bunin's prophetic diary of those cursed days... and remember.

Neal McCabe

Illich is faced with a problem. He deplores modern civilization as dehumanizing but recognizes only subsstence existence as an alternative. Unfortunately subsistence existence and other historically based cultures prensent strongly based sex roles. This flies in the face of feminism which denies the value of culurally defined sex roles and thus denies the values of Illich's ideal culture. Since feminism is a powerful political force, Illich must find a way to make his views compatible with it.

Illich overcomes this by defining modern sexual roles as sexist but historical cultural roles as gendered This is the book. He overcomes the challenge to his ideal by a linguistic definition. His history of social roles is spotty and biased to prove his point.

The book is a sophistic muddle. Mnay many better books that the social history of the home are available.

The reviewer who criticized Illich for not making his views compatible with feminism either has an agenda or misses his point. Yes Illich has a deep suspicion of modernity--and feminism is the defining discourse of modernity )or post modernity or whatever). Illich rejects a society in which everyone is a player--a geographic isolate in favor of something John Crowe Ransom and the Agrarians would have admired. Read the Odyssey for example: it is among other things a rule book of civility and societal harmony (and its enemies). The greatest scandal of present day academia and its cousins in the medea is its historical amnesia. Maybe traditional society has something to offer us (and I am curious to know what the reviewer thinks will happen when bacteria become resistant to all antibiotics) It is after all globalism starting from WWI hich has brought us pandemics of flu, aids and diseases yet unknown. The 19199 flue pandemic killed as many people as the plague of 1348. Hey I don't see that we've come that far.

Dr. Marcus should stick to what he does best, lecturing. This book tries to draw connections that are rarely justified, points that he may be successful in conveying to an audience in a lecture setting, but ones that seem totally off-the-wall in a book as brief as this one. Nevertheless, certain points do seem valid and interesting.

Professor Marcus writes exquisitely and fills his pages with fact, interpretation and analysis worthy or any scholar or student of history. He is a great teacher and an accomplished, satisfying writer. Recommended to everyone interested in the subject

Well I have not gotten past chapter 1 but though the book is published in Feb 2002, it was not written in it. It discusses the 1992 election that ushered in the Wilston and Shea administration. This sort of keeps the story from drawing me in.

I found The Year 2012 to be very interesting and inspiring. The way the scriptures were explained helped me to understand them in a way i never did before. It is good reading throughout. The end made me sad because I realized that something like this could happen! This is an incrediable story and everyone should read it. Judi Pullia, reader.

This introduction to the naval history of the Civil War suffers from the author's bias, which interferes with his ability to provide readers with a scholarly, objective analysis. Musicant sometimes seems to spend more time making snide remarks and calling people names than he does analyzing his sources.

However, if one can get past the bias, this is a reasonably complete introduction to the Civil War at sea, and the text is well furnished with quotes, which adds excitement. Ironclads get most of the attention here, with the commerce raiders and, strangely, the Hunley, rather scanted.

Ivan Musicant's account is thouroughly researched and highly accurate but lacks the enjoyable qualities of Still's or Melton's books on the same subject. While the largest portion on Musicant's book focuses on the USN and CSN ironclads the book is trying to cover too many things at once.

Nevertheless it is a good starting point for interested students of Civil War naval history but if your interest lies primarily in ironclads there is better.

Divided Waters becomes more usable as a reference when compared with and offset with Maurice Melton and William Still. I also felt that Mr. Musicant's angle was slightly subjective, leaning towards the Union eyewitness accounts.

In Divided Waters, Ivan Musicant provides a solid, although at times basic, overview of Confederate and Union naval efforts, strategies, conflicts and technological developments during the Civil War. Organized by theater of operations instead of chronologically, there are some moments where the events of one chapter seem odd in the context of the previous chapter, but this is a minor flaw. Probably the most interesting chapter is the all-too-short discussion of CSA-USA conflicts on the high seas and around the world; it is interesting to read about the delicate dance naval officers played in ports as far away as Brazil and France. Musicant is obviously a fan of ironclads, and a great deal of the book is devoted to their use in various campaigns. He gives equal time to their successes and shortfalls.

Given the fascinating, albeit monstrous, subject he had to work with, George Ivan Smith came up short. The book is written with less personality than Al Gore! Smith's writing is so dry that it is a struggle to wade through the slower parts(and there are many of them). Amin is infamous for his insanity, his humor, and for his brutality...Smith seems to want to focus more on his politics. Idi's politics weren't very interesting, hence the dullness of the book. Don't get me wrong, some of the madness is captured here. The trouble is that Smith can't keep his obvious bias and lack of comprehension out of the book. Idi Amin was a terrible human being, make no mistake about it, but Time magazine gave me more to hold my interest in one 1977 article than Mr. Smith manages in this 198-page yawn. Look elsewhere if you want to see the train wreck that was Idi Amin!

This book does give the reader a glimpse of the evil of the Idi Amin regime that terrorized Uganda from 1971 to 1979. It also gives us some insights as to how such an evil dictator could stay in power for so long while perpetrating so many dreadful crimes. It was a combination of other black African leaders studiously looking the other way and refusing to condemn him -- Julius Nyere of Tanzania being a major exception, considerable moral and material support from wealthy Islamic regimes such as Libya under Gadaffi, and, of course, sheer terror against all who dared to speak against him. My biggest problem with the book was its turgid style of writing: I found it necessary to re-read many a paragraph before I got the gist of what it was all about.

As opposed to the two previous reviewers, I thought this was an extremely well written and researched book. The author was a UN official during the 1970s and was able to draw upon his and his colleagues' experiences to form a very good portrait of one of the worst rulers in Africa's history. He starts with a very informative discussion of Amin's youth and career before he took over the Presidency of Uganda in 1971, destroying such myths as Amin's claim that he fought in Burma and India during World War II. He draws upon personal correspondance with former Ugandan President Milton Obote to provide a detailed account of Amin's coup and his foreign policy with other African countries in the 70s. Going in depth about Amin's search for oil in Lake Albert and his collusion in the assassination of Burundi's King Ntare V, Smith also provides the reader with an account of how bad life was in Uganda in the 70s. He justly praises the bravery of Makerere University students who stood up to Amin several times while condemning the lack of interest of other African politicians (except for Nyerere) and Western governments in putting an end to Amin's bloody regime.

The only criticism I would have of the book is the lack of any serious economic analysis of Uganda in the 70s - after all, it was Amin more than anyone else who turned Uganda from one of sub-Saharan Africa's richest countries to one of its poorest - but this is a minor quibble since that information is available elsewhere. This is a highly recommended book.

India is starting to look more and more as the real cradle of civilization so flying machines might not be too far out there. Childress has a theory without proof then writes a whole chapter on it (anti-gravity). If Childress had a better grasp of science he might be on to something but so far he seems too open to alternative science, Orthodox science isn't perfect but disregard and misunderstanding of it isn't a way to build your case.

having read this book thoroughly i appreciate the effort done by the auther.i also translated the same book in technical english,the book is very informative,it simplified many equipments and systems to prevent the viman from natural hezards,to supply enery from natural sources.i whole heartedly appriciate him.since last 32 years ,i was working in an industry manufacturing supersonic fighter aircrafts,having adventage of technical knowledge and command on sanskrit,i can suggest a few addendums if the auther can enter them in his next revised addition, i wish every technical men should read this book.

The author/editor provides us with a translation of ancient texts from India which purport to describe aircraft construction and operation. He then makes comments about the subject, including excerpts from related works. The point is that, according to Childress and others, the ancient civilization of India had made technological advances equaling and perhaps surpassing our own before it was mysteriously destroyed--perhaps in a nuclear war! I'm dubious, but his evidence is compelling nevertheless.

The book is interesting but covers a topic that if you use it, you have to pay $1,000 in rights to distribute it. The book ends up being a long advertisement for the software

While this is a pretty good book, I must say that just going to [a website], [and] downloading the 14 day trial (full software version with an expiration date if you decide not to buy), and use the 320 page User's Manual that comes with the download is a better idea. The User's Manual is actually very good-- every bit as good as this book ...which is just another way for Pendragon to advertise itself and rake in a little extra cash. If you are just getting this for yourself (I am a field biologist with no need to publish my created form) then the ... price tag is worth it.

The textbook and the associated trial software (as well as thediscounted price for the full software if you decide to buy) isa great package. It covers everything from the initial nuances of database programming to writing code. The Pentagon software itself is relatively robust. The only hidden problem is that once you have a workable/sellable software, they'll charge you $849.00 for the rights to distribute your database (ie "sale price" upgrade if you go through the Starter Kit- it's $995.00 otherwise). This is steep enough for me that I'll wait on going through the purchase of this otherwise good software package for now and go with HanDBase instead. The kit itself, though, is an excellent initial product.

This book could have been a winner, since it's topic is quite interesting. Rendall gives quite a comprehensive overview of the jet age combat, supplemented with action packed combat stories for each era. A promising combination indeed, but only when pulled off correctly.

However, the Rendall's analysis of the facts are weak and offers little, if any, new material or new insights. This is made even worse due to the numerous factual errors regarding equipments and terms. The combat stories are quite lively, but they are also plagued with errors that reduce its value to nothing more than an action story. Furthermore, whoever edited the final manuscript should either get a slap in the head or buy a better spell-checking software (preferably both) for letting so many typos slip beyond his (her?) nose.

Comparison to other books are inevitable. Two books comes to mind. The first is the classic Flight of the Intruder (Coonts). Although it is fiction, its attention to the technical accuracy is much better than this book. The other book is Clashes: Air Combat over North Vietnam 1965-1972 (Michel). Although much narrower in scope (it only covers the Vietnam War), it offers a much stronger analysis both in technological and political terms. Furthermore, the combat stories contained in Clashes are also both more exciting and much, much more accurate.

I cannot really recommend this book to anyone, except those who can look past the errors.

Ivan Rendall is a British television producer and his book is as superficial, incomplete, inaccurate and misleading as his medium. Its real value is as a series of vignettes of various fighter engagements. Do not buy it as a history of "Jet Combat from World War II to the Gulf War." It isn't.

Rendall's work is so USAF-centric, and "pointy-nose" focussed it could have been written by the fighter desk of the USAF's Public Affairs Office. Thoroughly ignored is any aircraft bearing an "A" or "B" prefix even if it is a jet. In addition, aircraft bearing the markings "USN" or "USMC" are only mentioned grudgingly.

As a result a major piece of the history of "jet" combat in Korea is ignored, including the USN's and USMC's vital roles in providing effective close air support to prevent the collapse of the Pusan perimeter. Subsequent historial investigation has revealed USAF close air support to have been ineffective, with North Korea and Chinese survivors going so far as to state that they "feared the blue planes the most." This critical effort is instead coopted to USAF F-84s.

The tremendous contributions of A-4 and A-6 fliers in Vietnam are almost entirely ignored. So too AV-8B, A-7 and A-10 fliers in the Gulf War. To all appearances, only F-100s, F-105s, F-4s, F-111s fought in Vietnam, and F-117s F-15s and F-16s in the Gulf. The crucial role of USN F-8 squadrons in showing the way to the reinstitution of gunfighting and the formation of Top Gun during the lull in the Vietnamese air war is entirely absent. So too is any mention of the F-8's unrivaled kill ratio in that conflict. Instead, Rendall's only nod to the USN is to document Cunningham and Driscoll. One suspects that had they not been the very first aces of that war, they too would have been ignored.

The two Gulf of Sidra incidents, and Operations Eldorado Canyon and Praying Mantis are not even mentioned.

His understanding of electronic warfare and precision munitions is pathetically bad. Once again he is blindly USAF-centric, laboring under the misconception that the E-3 and the E-8 are the sole hubs of the constellation of aircraft involved in electronic missions. His descriptions of precision weapons' guidance are very poor and misleading. His description of Gulf War Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses is particularly bad, and displays an ignorance of the geography, the weapons' capabilities and the techniques employed.

Once again he utterly misses the contribution of the USN, which provided better than half of the SEAD sorties that destroyed Iraq's air defense systems, and misattributes USN SEAD tactics to USAF aircraft.

The proof of the work's superficiality lies in the bibliography, which reads--with few exceptions--like a listing of works on jets which were available at Rendall's corner bookstore. His writing is almost exclusively from secondary sources and "picture books."

If you're interested in Vietnam jet combat, buy Michel's "Clashes," Tillman's "MiG Master," and Nichols and Tillman's "On Yankee Station." The last is listed in Rendall's bibliography, but he appears not to have read it (Cunningham and Driscoll's exploits excepted). For the Gulf War, I recommend Murray's "Air War in the Persian Gulf" and Friedman's "Desert Victory."

I used this book in researching my Air War College paper on Vietnam. It was useful in its description of tactics and the deployment of aircraft. The book's focus is primarily on the application of (jet) air power. It does not dwell on the overarching strategic decisions or the overall campaigns/conflicts. A reader would be well served by having a historical familarity with the conflicts before reading this book - but it isn't essential. It is an enjoyable read with good information and photos. (But, I agree with the earlier reviewer - the name for the book carries some strongly negative connotations - at least in the States.) Try it.