Take a photo of a barcode or cover
cucumberedpickle 's review for:
An easy, enjoyable, and unbearably sad read. However, it loses stars for three reasons.
1) Although a great patriot, he's not the best writer...entertaining, but not great.
2) I was under the impression more of the book would directly deal with the actual mission.
3) it is inconsistent.
Let me expand on that last one... (Preface: I DON'T like the media...at all. I don't even watch T.V. and am picky on where I get my news.) I believe it was inconsistent because the author tends to blame liberal media for his inability to conduct a militarily strategic war (i.e. If a SEAL or any other American serving in war kills another individual without following protocol they could potentially go on trial for murder) even though his underlying reason for (not) killing was clearly based on other factors. For instance, in the case of the goat herders, he specifically states he does not take their lives because of his religious beliefs. Religious. Beliefs. It is right there. I know he ranted about the prospect of being arrested and held accountable, but in the end, it was clear he felt an obligation to his beliefs not to kill them. The second instance is when the good doctor found him. Why, at this point (I know, he was in terrible shape), did he not kill them? It certainly wasn't because he had consulted the rules and came to the conclusion he would be considered a murder (because they had not fired at him). No, once again, there was something deeper there (unstated by the author) that made him decide, I'm not going out in a blaze like Danny, Mike, and Axe.
I know this isn't a popular view and I'm sorry, but I accept (and expect) that people (sometimes innocent) are to be killed at war and this is often due to a breach of protocol. I'm fine with that. Let them do everything in their power to live. If it were me I would show less restraint, panic, and kill everything that moved. (Here I would like to be clear that I do not have the balls to serve and I am humbled and grateful for those that do). But we have rules for a reason. If you send uneducated, inexperienced, young men into war (not at all referring to Navy SEALS) they can potentially make horrible decisions (rape, authentic and arbitrary murder, desecration of women and children [look to the Crusades, Nuremberg Trials, Mai Lai {American soldiers who have yet to be held accountable} 90's Chechnya...countless others]). Not to mention, become jumpy and accidentally kill one of their own. These people, (once again, I am grateful for their service) need to be curbed because they ARE young, inexperienced, and uneducated. Unfortunately, we cannot give one set of rules to one group and make exceptions for the others. Not the way the world works. I think in his heart the author knew this, and this fact, unfortunately, makes the book at little less and takes away from the true heroics that actually occurred
Sorry for all the digressions...proceed to call me an unAmerican liberal.
1) Although a great patriot, he's not the best writer...entertaining, but not great.
2) I was under the impression more of the book would directly deal with the actual mission.
3) it is inconsistent.
Let me expand on that last one... (Preface: I DON'T like the media...at all. I don't even watch T.V. and am picky on where I get my news.) I believe it was inconsistent because the author tends to blame liberal media for his inability to conduct a militarily strategic war (i.e. If a SEAL or any other American serving in war kills another individual without following protocol they could potentially go on trial for murder) even though his underlying reason for (not) killing was clearly based on other factors. For instance, in the case of the goat herders, he specifically states he does not take their lives because of his religious beliefs. Religious. Beliefs. It is right there. I know he ranted about the prospect of being arrested and held accountable, but in the end, it was clear he felt an obligation to his beliefs not to kill them. The second instance is when the good doctor found him. Why, at this point (I know, he was in terrible shape), did he not kill them? It certainly wasn't because he had consulted the rules and came to the conclusion he would be considered a murder (because they had not fired at him). No, once again, there was something deeper there (unstated by the author) that made him decide, I'm not going out in a blaze like Danny, Mike, and Axe.
I know this isn't a popular view and I'm sorry, but I accept (and expect) that people (sometimes innocent) are to be killed at war and this is often due to a breach of protocol. I'm fine with that. Let them do everything in their power to live. If it were me I would show less restraint, panic, and kill everything that moved. (Here I would like to be clear that I do not have the balls to serve and I am humbled and grateful for those that do). But we have rules for a reason. If you send uneducated, inexperienced, young men into war (not at all referring to Navy SEALS) they can potentially make horrible decisions (rape, authentic and arbitrary murder, desecration of women and children [look to the Crusades, Nuremberg Trials, Mai Lai {American soldiers who have yet to be held accountable} 90's Chechnya...countless others]). Not to mention, become jumpy and accidentally kill one of their own. These people, (once again, I am grateful for their service) need to be curbed because they ARE young, inexperienced, and uneducated. Unfortunately, we cannot give one set of rules to one group and make exceptions for the others. Not the way the world works. I think in his heart the author knew this, and this fact, unfortunately, makes the book at little less and takes away from the true heroics that actually occurred
Sorry for all the digressions...proceed to call me an unAmerican liberal.