If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"When Thunder Rolled" review in ASPJ
A shameless plug for the named book, which was recently reviewed in Air
& Space Power Journal with sentiments strongly akin to mine own. http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...v/rasimus.html "Not much in When Thunder Rolled is new: flying the Thunderchief in combat over North Vietnam in the mid-1960s was hazardous to one’s health; the theory of gradualism wasted airmen’s lives without having much impact on enemy decisions; and micromanagement of field leadership from afar had similar effects. Yet, Ed Rasimus manages all of that in an engaging way with readable prose and obvious pride in what he endured and achieved—but without the excessive chest thumping commonly found in such books... ....for an enjoyable read on what combat is like for company-grade officers, I recommend When Thunder Rolled." (And he hasn't even cut me in on the royalties for this ) -- When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite. W S Churchill Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Paul J. Adam wrote in message
... A shameless plug for the named book, which was recently reviewed in Air & Space Power Journal with sentiments strongly akin to mine own. http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...v/rasimus.html "Not much in When Thunder Rolled is new: flying the Thunderchief in combat over North Vietnam in the mid-1960s was hazardous to one's health; the theory of gradualism wasted airmen's lives without having much impact on enemy decisions; and micromanagement of field leadership from afar had similar effects. Yet, Ed Rasimus manages all of that in an engaging way with readable prose and obvious pride in what he endured and achieved-but without the excessive chest thumping commonly found in such books... ...for an enjoyable read on what combat is like for company-grade officers, I recommend When Thunder Rolled." It just showed up at my public library. I got it and look forward to it. -- Scott -------- "If nothing else comes out of this movie, at least we finally have liberals on record opposing anti-Semitic violence. Perhaps they should broach that topic with their Muslim friends." - Ann Coulter |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Paul J. Adam wrote:
A shameless plug for the named book, which was recently reviewed in Air & Space Power Journal with sentiments strongly akin to mine own. http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...v/rasimus.html "Not much in When Thunder Rolled is new: flying the Thunderchief in combat over North Vietnam in the mid-1960s was hazardous to one’s Never quite understood the "nothing new" aspect in a review of a personal memoir. Don't the reviewers understand the genre? anti-critic rampage Should someone come up with secret communiques from General Giap or LBJ and merge them into the "my experiences" book, to satisfy the "new" criteria? Does the book really lose points because it doesn't score in the "new" category? This seems to be a common point from critics! As if the author of a personal memoir is writing a song that "breaks new ground" from his previous album. Why do critics so slavishly look for this attribute in a work? /anti-critic rampage "Thunder" was a great book, whether "new" or not. SMH |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:45:47 -0500, Stephen Harding
wrote: http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...v/rasimus.html "Not much in When Thunder Rolled is new: flying the Thunderchief in combat over North Vietnam in the mid-1960s was hazardous to one’s Never quite understood the "nothing new" aspect in a review of a personal memoir. Don't the reviewers understand the genre? anti-critic rampage Should someone come up with secret communiques from General Giap or LBJ and merge them into the "my experiences" book, to satisfy the "new" criteria? Does the book really lose points because it doesn't score in the "new" category? This seems to be a common point from critics! As if the author of a personal memoir is writing a song that "breaks new ground" from his previous album. Why do critics so slavishly look for this attribute in a work? /anti-critic rampage "Thunder" was a great book, whether "new" or not. Thangyew, thangyew verrra much. Seriously though, the review is quite complimentary and ends with a recommendation, so the "nothing new" comment is just part of a lead-in. I'm very pleased that Air University finally got around to looking at the book. The AU quarterly will certainly make a lot of folks aware of it who haven't yet heard or read about it. It would certainly be nice if AWC or ACSC would put it on their recommended reading list. Now, if I can just break through the wall of silence at the Air Force Academy (which I live next-door to...) and get the cadets reading the book. New book still on track for this fall release. Title is still to be determined. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:45:47 -0500, Stephen Harding wrote: --cut-- "Thunder" was a great book, whether "new" or not. Thangyew, thangyew verrra much. Seriously though, the review is quite complimentary and ends with a recommendation, so the "nothing new" comment is just part of a lead-in. I'm very pleased that Air University finally got around to looking at the book. The AU quarterly will certainly make a lot of folks aware of it who haven't yet heard or read about it. It would certainly be nice if AWC or ACSC would put it on their recommended reading list. Now, if I can just break through the wall of silence at the Air Force Academy (which I live next-door to...) and get the cadets reading the book. New book still on track for this fall release. Title is still to be determined. Ed Rasimus I entirely agree with smh here re Thunder. ...and I sincerely hope that the lack of chest thumping which was evident in Thunder carries over to this book. It's one of the huge automatic turnoffs to me and it isn't needed, your clear readable sometimes self depreciating descriptions of events make the chest beating unnecessary. -- -Gord. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 19:46:45 GMT, "Gord Beaman" )
wrote: Ed Rasimus wrote: New book still on track for this fall release. Title is still to be determined. Ed Rasimus I entirely agree with smh here re Thunder. ...and I sincerely hope that the lack of chest thumping which was evident in Thunder carries over to this book. It's one of the huge automatic turnoffs to me and it isn't needed, your clear readable sometimes self depreciating descriptions of events make the chest beating unnecessary. Well, Gord, I can't be the young naive lieutenant again. I don't get into chest thumping, but I was six years older and on a second tour, so there's going to be a different perspective. The concept is to look at a war gone on too long and which no one wants to win. Why do people go to combat under those conditions? By the time we had been fighting the same war, from the same bases, against the same targets for nearly eight years, there had risen a strange cult of "fighter pilotry" with excesses of ritual, drinking and sex. There's some of that, a lot of flying missions, and some more interesting personalities. To tickle your fancy, here's the introduction: "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it." At Fredricksburg, December 1862 Gen. Robert Edward Lee, CSA Introduction: There is a fascination to war. It should not be entered lightly and once begun, should be waged to conclusion as quickly as possible. Once the threat to the nation, the challenge to world peace, the objective of public policy is met, the war should end. That would be the ideal solution in an ideal world, but we only recognize the loss of the ideal long after the moment for effective action has passed. That was the problem with the air war over North Vietnam. We had entered the war with resolution and patriotism. We overcame our fears and fought bravely for our nation, doing that which was asked of us and subjugating our questioning of policy, method, tactics and strategy. We were the offspring of Tom Brokaw's "Greatest Generation," a combination of George Cohen's Yankee Doodle Dandy and John Wayne's over-sized heroism that couldn't be beaten. We knew we were right and we knew we would prevail. But, that was at the beginning. When the air war started, no one thought it would last indefinitely. Certainly no one could have overlaid a series of starts and stops linking American political campaigns to the application of tactical air power. In '65, '66 and '67, we went to North Vietnam delivering good capitalist iron on the evil communists and suffering incredible losses. It was bearable because we knew that our leadership sought victory and the American people supported us. But, by 1968, it had become apparent that election victory for populist politicians on the home front was more important than victory in the war in Southeast Asia. That's when President Lyndon Johnson added one more stop to the sequence and announced an indefinite cessation of the air campaign against North Vietnam. From 1968 until the spring of 1972, we entered a period that Robert E. Lee couldn't have begun to comprehend. We weren't there to win and we didn't seem to want to lose. Fighter pilots went because it was the thing to do. It had become a career move, absolutely required for promotion and conferring the authority to swagger and pontificate to others who either had not yet been to the war or those who had been earlier. A culture of combat grew that leaned much more toward the fondness for war than the need to aggressively pursue victory. We fought to fight and with the most deadly targets suspended, it became simply a routine excursion expected of those who wore wings. While the ground troops facing the hell of jungle combat in the South still maintained a clear picture of the terrible nature of war, the fighter pilots in Thailand built a world on the machismo of it. Thailand became a place for those who hadn't made the cut as a fighter pilot when they graduated from pilot training to get quickly credentialed. Bomber drivers and trash-haulers, training commandoes and desk jockeys went through the pipeline that turned them into instant heroes. The catch was that the war had become institutionalized. It simply droned on and with any real objectives gone, the daily pattern became one of finding a use for the sorties with the rest of the day dedicated to designing new ways to demonstrate that somehow, those assigned to fly fighters were something special. Industries grew up to support the adrenaline addiction of near-combat as a third world nation tried to cope with the cultural overlay of tens of thousands of testosterone pumped American men flooding their country. We brought our society with us and once removed from the constraints of home, family, parents and civilization we ran amok. If there was sex in America, there would be sex in Southeast Asia, but without a senior generation to scold us at our excesses. If there were drugs in America, there would be drugs in the Far East, which was a lot closer to the source. If there was racial conflict in America, we could pack our racism and regionalism and red-neck attitudes and live out the entire range of ethnic stereotypes without a need for solutions or consideration. Yes, we could package all that was coming apart in America in the late '60s and concentrate it for reconstitution in Thailand. And, of course, there was drinking. You've got to drink to relieve the stress of combat. It's been a tradition as long as there has been aerial warfare. Nearness to possible death provided a reason for excesses. Then came April of 1972 and with the Paris Peace Talks bogged down once again, a president who had been elected to correct the mistakes of the Johnson administration saw his Vietnamization policy coming apart. It was time to finish the job and force the recalcitrant Communists back to the bargaining table. The Linebacker campaign resumed the bombing of the North and after three and a half years of relative security behind a political cease-fire, the targets of the enemy's heartland were again on the daily list. The defenses had the opportunity to concentrate and focus on the attackers and our technology had attempted to counter each technological advance. With the Linebacker campaign, we would again face serious threat and hopefully this time we would have the intent of winning. I told the story of my first combat tour in the F-105 during 1966 in When Thunder Rolled: An F-105 Pilot Over North Vietnam. This is the story of my return to combat in the summer of 1972, once again at Korat and once again flying to the same heavily defended targets in Route Pack VI, the valley of the Red River in and around the capital of Hanoi. The mind numbing terror of first combat had long receded. Now, it was a question of what we had become and whether I had "grown too fond of it." This is as much a sociological view as a combat memoir. There was certainly more than enough combat to go around, but it is also the story of personalities and interactions, excesses and idiosyncrasies. It's a look at the microcosm of America's finest, taken out of the society that had forsaken the war and placed, for better or for worse, at the cutting edge of the nation's policy sword. Here's the Woodstock generation coming face-to-face with Apocalypse Now. It isn't necessarily good or bad. It simply is the way it is. And, the way I remember it. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why do critics so slavishly look for this attribute in a work? I suppose it's a cheap way to assure the reader that the critic has read everything about the subject. It's like "full disclosure". Half the time you see "full disclosure" in a review or op-ed, the writer is just boasting about his connections, not warning the reader about a possible conflict of interest. (Full disclosu I write reviews for the Wall Street Journal all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 19:46:45 GMT, "Gord Beaman" ) wrote: Ed Rasimus wrote: New book still on track for this fall release. Title is still to be determined. Ed Rasimus I entirely agree with smh here re Thunder. ...and I sincerely hope that the lack of chest thumping which was evident in Thunder carries over to this book. It's one of the huge automatic turnoffs to me and it isn't needed, your clear readable sometimes self depreciating descriptions of events make the chest beating unnecessary. Well, Gord, I can't be the young naive lieutenant again. I don't get into chest thumping, but I was six years older and on a second tour, so there's going to be a different perspective. Yes, I understand that...and I'm looking fwd to reading it. Thanks for the introductionm to it... -- -Gord. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... I told the story of my first combat tour in the F-105 during 1966 in When Thunder Rolled: An F-105 Pilot Over North Vietnam. This is the story of my return to combat in the summer of 1972, How much am I going to miss if I don't read the first book? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Sheppard AFB review team findings announced | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | February 27th 04 02:52 AM |
"When Thunder Rolled" | Tex Houston | Military Aviation | 0 | November 29th 03 02:21 AM |
When Thunder Rolled | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 16 | September 10th 03 02:45 PM |
When Thunder Rolled Review | Ed Rasimus | Military Aviation | 5 | July 8th 03 06:22 PM |