<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: It still stings!
Review: As a World War II buff with a library of over seventy volumns on just the Pacicic theater, I would strongly recomend that the reader consult several other authors in this field before accepting many of John Toland's conclusions. He seems to be at odds with many other historians and the reader should be in a position to make his own conclusions.
Rating:
Summary: I was stunned at testimonies of those involved in the matter
Review: As the grandson of a good man who died at Pearl Harbor on the U.S.S Utah, in his sleep, I have a special interest in this topic. Firstly, did we know about the attack before it occurred? Secondly, how did our government deal with the uproar of the time that enraged our nation and drove us into the Pacific War with a blood-lust for vengeance. The shout of "Remember Pearl Harbor" was our Battle Cry and for good reason. Thirdly, I have found this book to be very specific and detailed, with information I had not previously been able to acquire, I.E: Interviews with the Naval Intelligence Officer who actually translated the Japanese "Winds" code prior to the attack, and who was prohibited from testifying at the Official Congressional, Army and Navy Hearings that comprise the "official" record as we have been handed it. This is a book that helps us all make our own minds up about who was responsible for the fact that we were caught sleeping, literally, when war was imminent and on the way to our Pacific outposts in early December of 1941. I give it 5 Eagle, Globe and Anchors for the Pearl Harbor History Buff in search of the "real" story that led us to War in the Pacific. Ronald Hinton USMC/Retired
Rating: 
Summary: Surprising Truth about Pearl Harbor
Review: I'll admit I'm new to this World War II stuff. And it wasn't until I saw the first preview for Pearl Harbor (the movie with Ben Affleck) that I started pursuing reading specific to this incident. But since then I've read A World At Arms, and more importantly, Prange's At Dawn We Slept, plus some lighter material on the Pearl Harbor attack. ...Toland is much more interested in making his case than presenting historical facts. But man, this is a good read. I read it in about three days--on the train, on the bus, in bed, during dinner. Compared to the style of Prange, et. al., this does indeed read like a novel. And had I no prior knowledge of this whole time in history I would easily have given this book five stars and recommended it to everyone I know. But I do have some knowledge, and when compared to the exhaustive objectivity of Prange, this book is flawed. I still don't know who's right, but Toland does a very poor job of making his case once you strip away the manipulative characterizations and language.
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing New Here.
Review: In an interview on C-SPAN, John Toland freely admitted he was staunchly anti-FDR, an opinion he attempts to subtle infect the reader with in Infamy. Along with FDR, Toland castigates Marshall, Knox, Stimson, and Stark with withholding vital information and supplies from Kimmel and Short based on third hand knowledge and the most flimsy of evidence. Samuel Eliot Morrison wrote a superb essay in the Atlantic Monthly during the late 1950s blasting the revisionist views towards Pearl Harbor made by Toland's predecessors on the subject Harry Elmer Barnes and Charles A. Beard. For those interested in a more credible account of the events preceding, the event itself, and the aftermath, buy Gordon W. Prange's At Dawn We Slept
Rating:
Summary: Biased reporting ....the decline of a once good author
Review: John Toland was an excellent writer. 'The last Hundred days' 'But Not In Shame' are both excellent books and are highly recommended. 'The Rising Sun' is good, very good in spots but the author was already losing his objectivity, clearly and sometimes blatantly. Toland was 'spinning' the story i.e trying to protray the Japanese as good intended ( the war was anti-communist not really imperialistic, yeah, right)culturally indoctrinated 'wrongheaded'( beheading POW's fits into Shinto, how exactly?). Even then He was trying to shift blame over unto the Americans as if the 'poor' Japanese had been duped by the manipulative Americans into war. But this book is almost a farce, come on, Roosevelt would let 'His' beloved navy get massacred so the American Public would permit us to go to war to save Europe? Sure there were hints clues signs there that the 20-20 vision of hindsight of history allow us to say that they could or should have been picked up on. Read Gordon Prange exhaustive series of books on Pearl Harbor for the real truth about the attack. Or read John Costello's book 'The Pacific War' for a very objective and much shorter recount of 'they knew what when' game that Toland weaves out of discredited and, in some cases, imaginary bits of psuedo facts. A good summation from that book is "The Japanese didn't want war, they just wanted Asia. And they were willing to go to war to get it." Toland has clearly lost his ability to to distinguish betweens facts and 'belief as fact'.
Rating:
Summary: Surprising Truth about Pearl Harbor
Review: This was a very interesting book as to the real truth behind the attack of Pearl Harbor. History says it was a surprise attack however, Washington "knew" that something was going to happen and chose not to tell the commanding officers of the Navy & Army in the Pacific about it. It was a very interesting book however, with so many people named in the book, it at times was hard to remember "who was who". The book also covers the scapegoats and "their day in court" to let the truth out to the general public. I would by this book again.
Rating:
Summary: Worth a read
Review: Toland is an excellent historian. He's put together a lot of different lines of evidence to insinuate that the United States was indeed aware of the Pearl Harbor attack before it happened. That's the gist of this book. Does he prove it? No. There is no absolute evidence that proves FDR and the State and War Departments knew that Pearl Harbor was about to be hit. Toland's circumstantial evidence IS very strong, though, and if what he writes here is true (and he documents it all), then it is very difficult not to reach the same conclusions he does. I've always found it difficult to believe that, with the threat of war obviously hanging over the United States and Japan, we had no idea where the Japanese Navy was. But, again, there is no absolute proof, no documents that say "FDR knew." But no other historian, not even Prange, brings up the evidence that Toland does. FDR apologists will hate this book. FDR haters will believe Toland has proven his case. Fair readers will wonder. Historians (and that's the way I make my living) will conclude Toland hasn't proven his point. Not absolutely. But he does do very good investigative work. We'll probably never know for sure what FDR knew or when he knew it.
<< 1 >>
| 
