Professor Robert C. Tucker's thin book, "The Soviet Political Mind" is an important commentative piece about the role of Soviet leaders, especially Stalin, in the nature of the development of the USSR's political landscape. This book is not meant to be a history text, which is not to say that the test is not factual. Tucker's claims about the leadership's role (as opposed to ideological or Russian historic forces) as the primary catalyst of state driven developments rests on the evidence of outward historical appearance and psychological presumptions. For example, Prof. Tucker makes claims about Stalin's disposition as an individual and the nature of his internal motivation to act in the way that he did without giving credence to, or even consideration of, his subsequent argument about the legitimizing power that his ideology possessed. Simply, Tucker argues, at times, that Stalin was a condemnable, aberrant personality in the Soviet experience, thereby undermining his later argument that Stalin was a natural outgrowth of the Soviet political landscape. This book is important because of its interesting unabashful approach to rational argument, however it should not be read without a serious critical eye.

If you thought they just build the Hubble Space Telescope and launched it, you're wrong. This book let you see what all such projects got to go through from the first bright idea and to the actual launch of an earth orbiting space vehicle. Sander Elvik, aerospace engineering student

This book is a non-sensationalistic, rather fair account of Joseph Stalin's life. The author goes out of his way to try to find actual documentation and explanations for Stalin's rise to power and subsequent life as dictator of the Soviet Union. This work is refreshingly free of the anti-communist hysteria of other more famous accounts. The only thing that rings untrue in the book is the possible 6 million victims of one year's famine in 1932- but look up the reference and we find that Mr. Mcneal used Robert Conquest as a source, thereby negating the aforementioned incredible number.

It's a shame that this book is out of print. It's an excellent book by an excellent author. This book contains all of the things you would expect from a biography of Stalin, including all of the stories of his childhood, etc. What makes this book interesting and controversial, however, is that Tucker dares to explore what effect his childhood might have had on his future personality (always dangerous ground for a historian) and detail his motives as well as his tactics in the struggle for power in the post-Lenin Soviet Union.

That said, it should be noted that, as is common with Tucker's books, this is the middle book in Tucker's biography of Stalin. It's focus is on his rise to power and the consolidation of that power in the Soviet Union, although it does deal slightly with other periods. Also useful is the chapter on Lenin. A very useful book for anyone interested in Russian studies, as Stalin was one of the shaping figures of the Soviet Union.

Those who remember being rankled or reassured by the political columns of the Alsop brothers during the 1950's will appreciate this thorough study of two of the most prominent journalists of their time, Joseph and Stewart Alsop.

This well written, well researched book is more than just a dual biography. It is a fascinating walk-though of the times which the Alsops reported with intelligent insights drawn from their unparalleled contacts.

Sons of a privileged Northeastern WASP family, the Alsops had the best of everything: education at Groton and then at Harvard; they had money; their cousin, Franklin Roosevelt, reigned supreme in the White House; their a great-uncle, Teddy Roosevelt, had become an historical monument. With these resources behind them, they applied their great talents as writers and their high intellects to make the most of it.

As partners in the syndicated newspaper columns, their contacts and influences put what they reported at the top of the list of "must reads". When they separated to go their separate ways, the flamboyant Joe remained a highly influential daily columnist while the more reflective Stewart won even greater praise for his Saturday Evening Post features in the days when the Post was the preeminent weekly family magazine.

The lives of the Alsop brothers paralleled the history of the United States during the mid-part of the 20th Century -- from the Depression to Reagan's election and finally the fall of the Soviet Union. It was because they participated in and reported history in the making that their biographies resonate with so much interest. We see Stewart parachuting behind enemy lines during World War II while Joe -- with General Chenault -- was chased by enemy troops over the rough terrain of China. We read of their many dinners and parties with their cousins the Roosevelts at the White House; their mutual abhorrence of Senator McCarthy; the benign acceptance but not idolatry of President Eisenhower; their love of Jack and Jackie Kennedy; their awful sorrow at President Kennedy's assassination; their encouragement and then their discouragement of the Vietnam war; the Watergate fiasco -- American history of that time in the raw -- from their perspective.

Through it all, Mr. Merry is able to paint good, memorable pictures of the flamboyant, often outrageous Joe and the down-to-earth Stewart and how they became important to the Washington of their times. This is a fine book, worth reading and owning.

A good if somewhat dated book on telephone survey methodology.

I admire the author's thoughtful words, but by ignoring the Reorganized LDS church, which the Prophet's son Joseph Smith III founded in 1860 with Emma Smith's assistance, a huge part of church history goes unmentioned. The RLDS (now called Community of Christ) has in it's headquarters in Independence MO, two portraits, one of Joseph Smith Jr, and one of his wife Emma Smith. I believe these were painted during Joseph's lifetime, thereby making the statement in the back of this book's jacket that the cover portrait is the only one painted during Joseph's lifetime inaccurate.

This short biography of the man now considered "My Joseph" by author Robert Remini, covering the life and death of the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith, is a well-researched, even-handed and concise examination of the life of a unique and great American. Drawing from sources as far apart as Joseph Smith's Personal Writings and John C. Bennett's Expose of Joe Smith and Mormonism, from scholars across the spectrum such as Fawn Brodie, Richard Bushman and Donna Hill, Remini has synthesized the important historical, biographical and often controversial information to be found about the life of Joseph Smith. The work is brief, as necessitated by the series, and can easily be read in one sitting.
Divided into nine chapters, Remini first introduces the reader to the American political and cultural context of the early 19th century, as the extent, fanaticism and individual, similar occurences to those of Smith during the Second Great Awakening are not a well-known part of his story. Indeed, Mormon readers well versed in the subject matter may find these interjections scattered throughout the book some of the most interesting and challenging material. Here and throughout the rest of the work Remini casually implies that Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon and much of what has become the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was a product of timing, a product of the unique American environment during the nation's infancy. Tracing and lightly touching Smith's ancestry, the author mentions episodes from Smith's adolescence he believes helped shape the character and disposition of later years. Smith's angelic and divine visitations are covered, along with the origins of the Book of Mormon and the beginnings of the Church. The reader is present during the fantastic events of the Church in Kirtland and its near subsequent collapse, for the wars with the old settlers of Missouri and during the flourishing, while controversial, period of Nauvoo and polygamy. The biography closes examining and ultimately denouncing the assassination of Joseph Smith, not as a slain prophet, consistent with the author's non-partisan stance, but as a great American, a victim of a society that bordered on the fringe of lawlessness.

As already mentioned, the book is even-handed and mostly accurate, the occasional detail, a misquotation from the Book of Mormon, for example, excusable for a reputable scholar undertaking this kind of endeavor. Mormons will disagree with some observations while non-Mormons will others. Not uncommon verbage found throughout the book often reads, "Mormons support or agree...while critics point out..." and vice-versa. All readers will find an entreating and page-turning presentation of Joseph Smith the man, innovator, prophet, politician, leader, family man, military leader and American.

"Smith admitted that some accused him of 'pretending to be a Savior, a worker of miracles, etc. All this is false...He is but a man, he said; a plain, untutored man, seeking what he should do to be saved.'"

To readers interested in a similarly unbiased, scholarly appraisal of the Book of Mormon, I would suggest the recent book By the Hand of Mormon by Terryl Givens, a professor of English at the University of Virginia. While Joseph Smith reads like an artistic biography, By the Hand of Mormon scrutinizes the possible origins of the Book of Mormon, internal and external evidences of its veracity, arguments on both sides of the divide and other topics.

I found this book pretty interesting because I was never really exposed to Mormonism and its prophet before. Most people have a very superficial view of the Mormons. If you asked the common man what they knew about Mormons, the first thing they would say is probably "polygamy". Of course, the truth is much more intriguing than that. This book is a good place to start, for it concerns the man whose "visions" sparked one of the most fascinating entries in American religious history.

Author Robert Remini does a great job of importing his wealth of knowledge concerning Jacksonian era America and using it to really explain the social context of Mormonism. His brief but interesting description of the Second Great Awakening really sets the stage for Joseph Smith's transition from failed farmer to holy prophet. At the time, especially in upstate New York, many Americans were swept up in religious fervor that involved fiery preachers and large-scale public rituals that seem to resemble mass exorcisms. Smith's family was very intoned with this sense of religious longing, and it no doubt influenced his future pursuits.

Remini is fair when he tackles some of Smith's religious "visions". This is hard because, frankly, if you look at the situation in a purely rational view, Smith is only a few degrees below a David Koresh figure. In fact, as I read the book, I could not help but to draw parallels between the two American messiahs. But that's my opinion, and Remini holds his own as an impartial historian. I felt, however, he sometimes looked too sympathetically on Joseph Smith. Although Smith does not seem to be a bad man, he did makes some "revelations" that could easily be identified as self serving, such as the amount of money he would take in, his unpaid debts, and his legalization of polygamy. Remini also treads too lightly on some of the Mormon's historical views, which are blatantly false.

Remini had a very hard job though, and these minor complaints I have do not take away from the books overall quality. I am sure Mormons will probably complain that Remini was too hard on Smith, so he really is stuck between a rock and a hard place. In summation, if you want a good starting place to study Mormonism and its early history, this is as best place to start as any.

I sat down on a flight to Chicago, looking forward to demolishing the new Robert Harris. 'Enigma' had been a reasonable read, if a little over done. Sadly, 'Archangel' was hard work. Great concept, and a pretty good initial hook, with Fluke Kelso uncovering this slender link to the hidden memoirs of Stalin. The first fifty or so pages sets up the premise and the story builds with some momentum....but by page 150, it still feels like set up!

Harris's style takes a bit of digesting and does not make for a fluid, easy read. His knowledge of history is great and I now feel better briefed on Russia's legend and culture. But his characters are a bit wooden and I never got to connect with Fluke Kelso.

The final few chapters do have some pace and some action, but it's more like Rambo than the 'great literary thriller' the cover boasted! Harris can do better and will do better. Harris is a writer worth sticking with - but not if he serves up another of these!

This is a compelling page-turner that will keep you up at night. If you enjoy cold-war thrillers, Robert Harris has figured out how to bring them back to life in this post cold-war era. This book has an outstanding plot tied to a secret notebook that was supposedly stolen from Stalin on the day that he died. From the moment we learn of this missing notebook (on about page 2) through to the last page, Harris takes us on a wild ride from Moscow through the Northern reaches of what used to be know as The Soviet Union. The story never slows.

Harris is a masterful fiction writer. He uses words that paint pictures so vivid that we feel we are with the characters. He weaves historical facts into a wonderful tale that had me reading every free minute over the course of three days. If you are looking for an exciting piece of fiction, don't miss adding this book to your reading list.

First off, for those of you think that "Archangel" is an alternate history in the tradition of Harris' excellent "Fatherland", it's not. This novel is more of a "what if"; an examination of the ripple that one change in history might have. I don't want to discuss the specifics for fear of ruining the plot, but suffice it to say that it involves the politics of modern day Russia.

Overall this is a strong novel. Harris once again makes good use of real history to set the tone, and in this case displays an astute take on the political situation in Russia. He wisely recognizes that freedom without prosperity can make people nostaligic for even the most brutal regimes. Furthermore, in its latter stages, "Archangel" serves as a cautionary tale for the dangers of nationalism run amok.

So there is a lot of meat to this novel. Unfrotunately, Harris hurries through the last 50 pages or so. Of course, I understand the need to create a sense of urgency and pace to any thriller, but by the end I almost felt like he was just bailing out. There were a lot of different paths that might have led to a more satisfying conclusion.

All in all though, "Archangel" is a strong political/thriller, which is let down, but not ruined, by a rather rushed conclusion.

I have been reading Ludlum for the better part of 25 years. I've read virtually all of his novels. I even suffered through the film version of "The Osterman Weekend". However, while reading "The Hades Factor", I couldn't help but wonder how much, if any, of this mess was written Ludlum and how much was actually written by Gayle Lynds who is listed as co-author.

According to this book, the world is divided into three groups. Group one is made up of an apparently large number of people who would participate in the murder of millions if it would make them rich. Their method of mayhem is the random release of a deadly virus. Since they have no real way of controlling the means of spreading the virus, it means that any of their family or friends could be infected.

The second group is even larger. It is made up of people who are so stupid, they probably deserve to be infected. They are incapable of seeing any relationship between the sudden spread of an unknown virus and group one who will make billions through the use of a "miracle cure" that they just coincidentally happen to have.

The third group is a handful of people who are the heroes of the story. They include a doctor who happens to also be an army commando, a British spy who is sort of a senior citizen version of James Bond, and two characters who are mandatory for this type of book, a beautiful CIA agent and a computer geek. Talk about clichés. The doctor is named Jon Smith. I guess the originality in there was dropping the "h" from his first name.

For those of you who don't know, Ludlum has had heart problems the past few years and has had surgery. Perhaps it has taken something out of him. Perhaps his medical bills have caused him to license out his name to Ms. Lynds. I noted that there is another installment of the adventures of Dr. Smith coming out soon that lists a different co-author. Perhaps Ludlum has decided that he should be more careful about who cashes in on his readership.

Three people in different parts of the U.S. die suddenly and dramatically of a bizarre, unknown virus. What connection could there be between them? And how can this virus be stopped before it claims more victims?

That's the set-up for this collaboration between thriller-meister Robert Ludlum and relative newcomer Gayle Lynds. This is something new for Ludlum, a series written in conjunction with other authors (ala Tom Clancy's Op-Center books). This is to be the first in a series of adventure-thrillers about a government action squad called "Covert One." I'm withholding judgment on the concept until more books come out, but for now I'm cautiously optimistic.

The story is solid, although familiar. It's obviously reminiscent of Richard Preston's "The Hot Zone," along with dozens of thrillers. That's not to say it's bad, though. I enjoyed the swiftly-moving plot, and found the characters to be interesting. The protagonist is Lt. Col. Jon Smith, a medical doctor, expert on killer viruses, and all-around man-of-action. He's a fairly typical lead character for a book of this sort. Smith is interesting enough, though, and smarter than the norm, which was a nice change.

Even better was the character of Smith's sidekick, Martin Zellerbach, a computer genius with a rare form of autism. I hope he returns in subsequent books because I found him fascinating.

This reads like Ludlum-lite, featuring his brand of paranoid action and suspense, but without the depth of plotting and sophistication that characterizes his best work. It's noticeably different from the rest of his output, although maybe that's a plus given the quality of his last few books.

"The Hades Factor" is recommended for thriller lovers and anyone looking for an exciting summer read.

I absolutely loved this novel from Ludlum considering I have never read anything of his before. This book kept me enthralled from the very first page and would let go.

Lt Col Jon Smith (USAMRIID) is trying to investigate the death of his beloved Dr Sophia Russell, who was killed after doing some detective work on a very rare virus that seemed to be kiliing random people across the world. This virus had Ebola-type symptoms and after Sophia goes digging into what sort of virus it is and where it comes from, somebody thinks she is better off dead.

Smith enlists the help of 2 friends to uncover a myriad of missing documents, doors slammed shut and unethical scientists that seem to love making terrible viruses and trying them out to see what would happen, but the question is why??

I thought this was a sensational read, not too heavy and very well written. Being a research biochemist myself, I love the way Ludlum incorporated todays technology into a suspense thriller that was able to keep me up all night! Excllent piece of fiction, Mr Ludlum, I will definately be reading everything else that you have written!

Highly recommended!

McNamara seeks to explain in this book the failure of American policy in Vietnam. He roots that failure mainly in false assumptions about the intentions of the North Vietnamese -- that is to say, they were actually nationalists first, communists second, and would not have acted to destablize Southeast Asia has we simply found a way for them to unify and rule the whole of Vietnam. He also demonstrates the remarkable lack of management skills of those known as the "best and the brightest." For example, he discusses how they failed to coordinate military actions with efforts to establish diplomatic negotiations; he talks about lack of historical knowledge about Vietnam among policymakers; he documents the remarkably inept and cavalier handling of the Diem situation. The book is useful in that it does show just how limited the vision of some of our policymakers is -- it hard to believe, given the French experience in Vietnam, that our top officials did not avail themselves, for example, of that history, yet McNamara basically argues that there were no "experts" to help guide their efforts. Unbelievable.

The book is useful in understanding the limited period of Kennedy/Johnson, but McNamara does not provide any deeper analysis of Nixon policies, or explore the historical issues that led up to the 1960s in any depth at all. In that sense, the book is almost as limited as the policy McNamara helped shape. Whether the war was "just" or not, whether the communist threat was real or not, it is mainly incompetence that seems to have shaped our policy -- there was not even a group within the policymaking establishment dedicated to the war full time. These are basic management and leadership issues that suggest mainly that the guys running the show were not so bright after all. I am hoping his second book on this subject, Argument without End, provides a more detailed analysis of the real issues that shaped that period of our history -- it includes discussions between US policymakers and the North Vietnamese.

This book is a powerful explanation of what many people called "McNamara's War." It is intellectually honest, well-researched and an enormous insight to how President Lyndon Johnson's White House operated. The author explains how Johnson inherited a "God-awful" mess eminently more dangerous than the one Kennedy had inherited from Eisenhower. One evening not long after he took office, Johnson confessed to his aide Bill Moyers that he felt like a catfish that had "just grabbed a big juicy worm with a right sharp hook in the middle of it," McNamara writes. In the last two chapters, "Estrangement and Departure" and "The Lessons of Vietnam" McNamara bravely admits many mistakes. The most glaring was not holding the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff accountable for its many reporting failures. It took McNamara nearly thirty years to finally tell his side of the story. It was worth the wait.

One cannot help but wonder what our current Secretary of Defense will write when his time comes. One has the feeling that the subtitle of McNamara's retrospective, "The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam," will be a good starting place for that "sequel." McNamara writes, "We were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it to future generations to explain why." Americans today will have to decide whether or not we have actually learned our lessons and are now more wise than the last generation, more able to predict the tragedies that will arise during and after today's war. Anyone who recalls the Kissinger scheme to achieve "a decent interval" while bugging out of Southeast Asia will likely recall Eric Von Marbod comparing the logic of that process to that of "a man who impregnates nine women in the hope of getting a baby in one month." How can one not think of Afghanistan, Iraq, (and now Iran) without thinking of the Vietnam era? Despite all the criticism directed at him, the author reflects great credit upon himself and the country by even attempting to set the record "straight." One can indeed be wrong even when totally convinced one is "acting in the principles and tradition of this great nation." How could we have slipped out of Vietnam if we had really believed in the domino theory used to justify that war? What will become of the "nexus of WMD and terrorism" that is today's rationale for preventive war? As we watch to see how we extricate ourselves from the war on terror, there is much to be learned from the old political schemes of Robert McNamara's era.