I won't take issue with the--"not a well written"-- book review (Schmerguls: Mar 3, 2008). I lack the technical expertise to comment on that dimension. However, I can say this. The book was easy to read. It was well laid out chronologically. Early material laid the necessary foundation for understanding later material. The book told a profound story with a cohesive theme. The narrative material projected the reader into the writer's situation. This enabled an "empathic response" which is always a bonus compared to the commonplace "intellectual" response. There was detailed historical material permitting any "reader of interest" to appreciate the situation and setting without having to be a historian. The clarity of theme would cause most readers to thoughtfully reconsider what they might have otherwise assumed. So in my view, this book is both a unique and valuable contribution to related literature on this topic and of this era. Part of the pervious reviewer's criticisms rather remind me of the "Siskel and Ebert" review of the "Rambo" movies. Categorically depicted as worthless trash, yet exceeding "all time" box office records. We are well advised to balance our "technical" critiques with an assessment of the "public utility" a work offers. As such, this is exactly what the previous reviewer (Schmerguls) did. And to that extent, we are in agreement. ( )

2758 Those Gallant Men: On Trial in Vietnam, by John Stevens Berry (read 14 Jun 1995) This is an astoundingly poorly written book, and yet I found it moving and it made me reflect on the enigma which was wartime in Vietnam--how much evil there was there, was it worse than other wars? Well, it seems so. The author spent a year as a defense lawyer in Vietnam. His biggest case was defending one of he Green Berets accused of killing a double agent. He said there were cover stories on the case in Time and Newsweek in 1969. On Sept 29, 1969, the Government declined to prosecute. This was a book worth reading, even though it is so poorly written. ( )