<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A compelling, insightful reflection on an ugly period.
Review: A few years ago I received a letter from Eric Bergerud requesting information regarding my service with the 25th Infantry Division in Vietnam. When I saw that Dr. Bergerud was an academic, with a connection to Berkley, I dismissed the request out of hand. Berkley had been the source of some of the most extreme criticism of the war and the soldiers who served therin. I erred in not responding to Dr. Bergerud's information request.Years fade and conditions change. Change began with one significat event. The Wall went up on the mall in D.C. Its simplicity and haunting design erodes the barriers of time and space. No one who was there can look upon the Wall and fail to see his reflection looking back at him through the names of absent comrades. Now, five years after its initial publication, I have discovered Bergerud's book. Its effect is similar. I cannot recommend this book strongly enough. I know some of the people quoted in it and neither they nor any of the rest of us who served there were made to look as villainous as we have been previously portrayed by the media and academia. My only objection to the book and the only fault I found with it came at the end. I have been present in the field with Field and Company-grade officers, and I have seen General officers on-site. Perhaps it may have been the early stage of the war, but during my participation in it (I was an RTO) my unit, 4/23 Inf., was constantly involved in Battalion sized operations. The Battalion commander, LCL Bzarcz was continuously in the field. I saw the XO, MAJ Crim take a load of shrapnel in his leg and refuse medical evacuation. I walked, with MAJ Hamlin through the world's scariest minefield. Only later did it occur to me that whatever minefield you're in is the world's scariest. One evening GEN Weyand landed inside the Bn. perimeter. In another incident, the Bn. lost several helicopters filled with men from Co. A in the Iron Triangle. While preparing for a rescue operation with the Recon Platoon, I saw! Generals from my own Division, the 1st Infantry Division and the 1st Cavalry Airmobile. To state that these men took no risk, or were somehow imune to it, demeans their integrity and valor. In my experience, such statement is untrue. The book is powerful and insightful. I believe it is must reading for those of us who served there and all others who would attempt to see the war through grunt's eyes.
Rating:
Summary: From one who was there
Review: I served with the 25th Infantry Division in Vietnam--the unit which is the subject of Red Thunder, Tropic Lightning. I have read over a hundred books about Vietnam, but was really impressed with this work. Dr. Bergerud and his oral contributors, one of whom was in my squad, tell it the way it was. I've read other books by Eric Bergerud and consider him a meticulous researcher and brilliant historian. I believe the 25th Infantry Division Association, who recently honored Dr. Bergerud with their Stanley R. Larsen Award for his efforts on this book and his portrayal of the "Tropic Lightning" (25th) division, speaks louder than the "reader from VA". I'd highly recommend this book to anyone interested in what it was really like to be an infantryman in Vietnam.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating tales from Vietnam.
Review: I was in Vietnam from Nov 69 to Nov 70 in the 2/22 Inf ( M ) 25th Infantry Division. My MOS was 11C20 ( 81MM mortar crewman on an APC ). This book uses actual quotes fron Vets, and presents a much different picture than the one Oliver Stone paints in "Platoon". Of course the truth always needs poetic license to make it salable. Anyway, if you want a down-to-earth nitty gritty book about the Grunt's eye view of Vietnam, this is the one. I have read many books on the subject and this ranks right up there with the books by Al Santoli ( also a 25th Div. Vet ). A must for all Vietnam combat vets.
Rating:
Summary: Well-written accurate and moving
Review: I was there too (June 68 to Junre 69), so let me add my voice to that chorus. In addition, this book is very well-written and a pleasure to read. There has been more nonsense written about Vietnam than the next 10 subjects combined; this book is a good start toward an antidote to all those years of lies. Vietnam veterans will love it. Non-veterans looking for the truth will find it fascinating and enlightening. Strong recommended.
Rating:
Summary: May we someday understand what our Veterns did for us.
Review: I've had people tell me that this book reads like a History book. Maybe so , but it's a history book the average citizen can understand.Eric writes about a Division (the 25th) that unless you are a vet,very few people know of. This division didn't receive the aclaim that others did , but should have. They fought bravely in an area north west of Sigon known as War Zone C which included the dreaded Iron Trangle,Hobo Woods, and along the Cambodian border. This Division suffered some of the highest casualties of the war.(5000+) The vets Eric interviewed were real grunts. They told their story as it was when they were there. They didn't try to make themselves look like hero's, they talked about the fear, the loneleness,the good times, and the times they cried when they lost a buddie. If you want to read a good book that covers the Vietnam War from begining to end (10 yrs)this is it.
Rating: 
Summary: If you like childish assumptions...
Review: If you read lots of military history, read this:
If you read this book, only read if for the EDITED and not ORIGINAL quotes of veterans. Bergerud made an attempt to simplify the book for the casual reader, which was probably not the best idea. The average reader does not read history, and the odds are that everyone who bought this book knew quite well what an APC is. Also, Bergerud makes ... comments like "THE TROPIC LIGHTNING DIVISION WAS THE BEST DIVISION IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!!!". Not quite that extreme, but, it verges on that level. I mean no offense to the Tropic Lightning Division, as I regard them with the utmost respect, as I do for every veteran. My intention is to illustrate the author's seemingly sophmoric writing style.
Rating:
Summary: hagiography, worth reading in combination with other works
Review: Reading Red Thunder, Tropic Lightning brought me back to the feeling I had in High School upon reading a book simply titled "Nam." I suppose that my fascinations to buy and read that book stemmed from the fact that my friends' fathers and friends of my parents' sons had gone to Vietnam and yet none of them really talked about it when they returned... even when asked. One of my friends' fathers told only one story, that of patrolling in the forest and the `Three Step Snake.' If it bit you, you would be dead in three steps. His telling only of the flora and fauna of Vietnam left me wondering what had happened in Vietnam. I had become interested in history as a child through military history. But Vietnam was almost so close to me that I could touch it. I saw it on the nightly news, as well as the local SF Bay Area protests. I had watched the last helicopter leave from the US embassy on the news. So what about three step snakes. What about the people I wondered... I also wondered how `we lost' and bought a book describing various sequences of battle but the men I met or knew never talked about it. Eric Bergerud's book tells that story from the position of the 25th Infantry Men's perspective. The use of both officers and enlisted is appreciated. Though Sheehan's book is well written, I grew annoyed at his failure to give the names of the NCOs that supported Vann and his intel and ops officers. That neglect seems to perpetuates the thinking that somehow they are less qualified to comment... OK for fodder, not worth remembering their names and their sacrifices. Bergerud not only counters such a notion, but embraces the enlisted man's view. The way in which the book structures similar experiences gives one a deep sense of appreciation for these Soldiers (hopefully regardless of one's personal position on the Vietnam War.) These are not men telling triumphalist embellishments, or `there I was' stories. Though Platoon was based on a real attack, there are some things a film of Platoon's sweep cannot convey. Some of the things that film can't always do even with a narration are like the feeling a soldier has. The GI's telling of the lack of comprehension of what was going on didn't mean they didn't sense that they were being used. But his recollection of the Colonel's speech about being rewarded and decorated only becomes clear after the fact. They had been the bait. (Bergerud, 154.) The Soldier does not go on to mention however, that the awards and decorations for many that stood in that formation listening to the colonel's speech would only be awarded and decorated posthumously. In light of this speech by the colonel, the scene of vets at anti-war rallies in Washington DC throwing their medals back with looks of anger, anguish, bitterness, and despair resonates at an even deeper level. However, as strategy goes, the tethered goat tactic was successful. In many ways, the crucified Elias character in Platoon was the only way the film could represent the potential sacrificial victims. I also appreciated the highlighting of the petty parochialism of the units that made up the 25th Division. The artillery units' shooing of the infantrymen from their water buffalo (The water tank truck) is completely real. It is also understandable that the infantry are somewhat dismissive of the comparatively easy life led by the Air Force units (see 173.) Of course at least within the 25th Division these units' parochial tendencies evaporate immediately after the attack on `Burt' establishes the bond of brotherhood. (This attack is at the end of the movie "Platton".) One preference I would have had would have been that Mr. Bergerud designated the rank of the Soldiers at the time that their stories pertain to. He does usually do the formal citing of retired officer ranks, but there seem to be many of the enlisted whose ranks are never mentioned other than a Sergeant here and there. I also believe there was room for some analysis. The portions speaking to the lack of career NCOs and the decline of discipline is also worth highlighting. As the Soldier who observed the phenomenon noted, many of the instantly promoted men were fine leaders in combat, but the absolute breakdown in military discipline and an increase in unacceptable behavior rose sharply until the final pull out of US forces. Bergerud's perspective on Tet was also worth reading as it challenged my notion of what had happened. In retrospect, though I believe American war planners in the Pentagon were mad with blood lust, and like their presidential aministrations, they couldn't conceive of the possibility of defeat. Yet it seems that the Tet truly had sapped the fighting strength of the Popular Front forces. In that light, it seems that the idea of a weakened VC as turning into a victory could be understood. One hears Colonel Mathieu's voice (Battle of Algiers) coming through the soldier discussing the `no-fire zone.' Mathieu tells about how he had requested a `free hand' in Algeria but was denied. Oliver Stone served in the 25th Infantry Division. Stone's character, SSGT Barnes, also complained of those in Washington "trying to win this war with one hand tied to their balls" as soldiers of the 25th sustained fire but had to wait for permission to return fire into that `no-fire zone' around Saigon. (Bergerud, 172.) These voices are those of soldiers. They couldn't know that even if the VC's war fighting ability had been greatly reduced, the people were still not inclined to support the corrupt Saigon government, just as the Algerian people no longer wanted the French even though the NLF cells had been crushed. (See the movie Battle of Algiers.) If Marilyn Young's book "The Vietnam Wars" provides an overview of historical factors and policies and politics, we see America's involvement in Vietnam through her work at 30,000 feet. Neil Sheehan's book "Bright Shining Lie" with its histories and examination though the life of John Paul Vann gives us a Helicopter view at 2,000 feet. Bergerud's work is on the ground where the American Soldiers fought and died (and for some it was worse, to survive, with all its horror.)
Rating:
Summary: hagiography, worth reading in combination with other works
Review: Reading Red Thunder, Tropic Lightning brought me back to the feeling I had in High School upon reading a book simply titled "Nam." I suppose that my fascinations to buy and read that book stemmed from the fact that my friends' fathers and friends of my parents' sons had gone to Vietnam and yet none of them really talked about it when they returned... even when asked. One of my friends' fathers told only one story, that of patrolling in the forest and the 'Three Step Snake.' If it bit you, you would be dead in three steps. His telling only of the flora and fauna of Vietnam left me wondering what had happened in Vietnam. I had become interested in history as a child through military history. But Vietnam was almost so close to me that I could touch it. I saw it on the nightly news, as well as the local SF Bay Area protests. I had watched the last helicopter leave from the US embassy on the news. So what about three step snakes. What about the people I wondered... I also wondered how 'we lost' and bought a book describing various sequences of battle but the men I met or knew never talked about it. Eric Bergerud's book tells that story from the position of the 25th Infantry Men's perspective. The use of both officers and enlisted is appreciated. Though Sheehan's book is well written, I grew annoyed at his failure to give the names of the NCOs that supported Vann and his intel and ops officers. That neglect seems to perpetuates the thinking that somehow they are less qualified to comment... OK for fodder, not worth remembering their names and their sacrifices. Bergerud not only counters such a notion, but embraces the enlisted man's view. The way in which the book structures similar experiences gives one a deep sense of appreciation for these Soldiers (hopefully regardless of one's personal position on the Vietnam War.) These are not men telling triumphalist embellishments, or 'there I was' stories. Though Platoon was based on a real attack, there are some things a film of Platoon's sweep cannot convey. Some of the things that film can't always do even with a narration are like the feeling a soldier has. The GI's telling of the lack of comprehension of what was going on didn't mean they didn't sense that they were being used. But his recollection of the Colonel's speech about being rewarded and decorated only becomes clear after the fact. They had been the bait. (Bergerud, 154.) The Soldier does not go on to mention however, that the awards and decorations for many that stood in that formation listening to the colonel's speech would only be awarded and decorated posthumously. In light of this speech by the colonel, the scene of vets at anti-war rallies in Washington DC throwing their medals back with looks of anger, anguish, bitterness, and despair resonates at an even deeper level. However, as strategy goes, the tethered goat tactic was successful. In many ways, the crucified Elias character in Platoon was the only way the film could represent the potential sacrificial victims. I also appreciated the highlighting of the petty parochialism of the units that made up the 25th Division. The artillery units' shooing of the infantrymen from their water buffalo (The water tank truck) is completely real. It is also understandable that the infantry are somewhat dismissive of the comparatively easy life led by the Air Force units (see 173.) Of course at least within the 25th Division these units' parochial tendencies evaporate immediately after the attack on 'Burt' establishes the bond of brotherhood. (This attack is at the end of the movie "Platton".) One preference I would have had would have been that Mr. Bergerud designated the rank of the Soldiers at the time that their stories pertain to. He does usually do the formal citing of retired officer ranks, but there seem to be many of the enlisted whose ranks are never mentioned other than a Sergeant here and there. I also believe there was room for some analysis. The portions speaking to the lack of career NCOs and the decline of discipline is also worth highlighting. As the Soldier who observed the phenomenon noted, many of the instantly promoted men were fine leaders in combat, but the absolute breakdown in military discipline and an increase in unacceptable behavior rose sharply until the final pull out of US forces. Bergerud's perspective on Tet was also worth reading as it challenged my notion of what had happened. In retrospect, though I believe American war planners in the Pentagon were mad with blood lust, and like their presidential aministrations, they couldn't conceive of the possibility of defeat. Yet it seems that the Tet truly had sapped the fighting strength of the Popular Front forces. In that light, it seems that the idea of a weakened VC as turning into a victory could be understood. One hears Colonel Mathieu's voice (Battle of Algiers) coming through the soldier discussing the 'no-fire zone.' Mathieu tells about how he had requested a 'free hand' in Algeria but was denied. Oliver Stone served in the 25th Infantry Division. Stone's character, SSGT Barnes, also complained of those in Washington "trying to win this war with one hand tied to their balls" as soldiers of the 25th sustained fire but had to wait for permission to return fire into that 'no-fire zone' around Saigon. (Bergerud, 172.) These voices are those of soldiers. They couldn't know that even if the VC's war fighting ability had been greatly reduced, the people were still not inclined to support the corrupt Saigon government, just as the Algerian people no longer wanted the French even though the NLF cells had been crushed. (See the movie Battle of Algiers.) If Marilyn Young's book "The Vietnam Wars" provides an overview of historical factors and policies and politics, we see America's involvement in Vietnam through her work at 30,000 feet. Neil Sheehan's book "Bright Shining Lie" with its histories and examination though the life of John Paul Vann gives us a Helicopter view at 2,000 feet. Bergerud's work is on the ground where the American Soldiers fought and died (and for some it was worse, to survive, with all its horror.)
Rating:
Summary: Red Thunder, Tropic Lightning - The Way It Was
Review: This book is right on the mark and describes the experience of the 25th Division infantryman with candor and accuracy. I recommend it to anyone with an interest in the Vietnam War. You can't get any more detailed or closer to the combat experience than Eric Bergerud conveys in this work. The voices you hear are those of our 25th Division veterans telling their experiences as they happened to them. This is a great work destined to remain a major resource for future historians who seek to understand the Vietnam War.
Rating:
Summary: Red Thunder, Tropic Lightning - The Way It Was
Review: This book is right on the mark and describes the experience of the 25th Division infantryman with candor and accuracy. I recommend it to anyone with an interest in the Vietnam War. You can't get any more detailed or closer to the combat experience than Eric Bergerud conveys in this work. The voices you hear are those of our 25th Division veterans telling their experiences as they happened to them. This is a great work destined to remain a major resource for future historians who seek to understand the Vietnam War.
<< 1 >>
| 
