Rating: 
Summary: A bit of clarity in the fog of war
Review: A refreshing departure from the usual dose of idolatry and statist dogma which accompanies most accounts of presidential activities. The idea that US presidents are "great men" has got to go. Highlighting their salient flaws and errors is a necessary non-partisan activity which provides a corner stone for guessing the truth about the skills and motivations of our current leaders. We need a similar book on Woodrow Wilson, (an FDR favorite), who we may thank for the Federal Reserve system and US involvement in World War I, two of the greatest blunders ever committed in America.
Rating:
Summary: Iconoclasm at its Best
Review: As a librarian, I read a lot of books and see even more. This book has influenced me as few before it have. Mr. Fleming makes points that few historians dare consider, and hence, few people are aware of.
The first point is that the decision to enter WWII is more popular today than it ever was when it was occurring. Not only did the vast majority of Americans initially oppose entry, but Roosevelt had to continuously engage in political contortions and distortions to ensure America continued to support it as it ensued.
Mr. Fleming doesn't explicitly state that the U.S. should have never entered WWII, but this book could sure be interpreted as such. My interpretation is that had FDR abandoned his absurd policy of unconditional surrender and cooperated with the clandestine Germans For Decency, that the Western front could've been closed in 1943 (saving countless millions of lives--including the majority of Holocaust victims). FDR's hatred for all things German led him to frivolously destroy a substantial part of the legacy of Western Civilization--much to the glee of Leftists and other enemies of the West.
One can draw numerous subsidiary points from this book. Had FDR decided to collaborate with Canaris, Nazi atrocities would've been brought to an immediate halt, leaving the combined forces, under allied control, to stop Stalin's reign of terror. Had this happened, countless lives would've been saved in addition to those lost to the war. The U.S. would've also been spared the tensions and prohibitive costs of a fifty-year cold war. This book supports contentions that FDR merely began WWII; it took Reagan to actually win it by defeating the Soviets.
Mr. Fleming also goes into great detail on FDR's naivete towards Stalin in particular, and communism in general. He deserves the full oppobrium that goes with being an acolyte and patsy to Stalin. As such, FDR's legacy also includes the enslavement of a quarter of the world's population under communism. This book is one more well-deserved nail in the coffin of FDR's favorable legacy.
Rating: 
Summary: Another perspective
Review: As an American History major and life long student of WWII, FDR and the Depression, I find some of Fleming's observations and perspectives to be stimulating. If he was not so apparently biased against Roosevelt he'd carry more weight. He faults Roosevelt for EVERY move he makes. If FDR made a move that was ideologically based, Fleming criticizes him for not being pragmmatic, if FDR made a decision that was pragmatically based, Fleming criticizes him for not being true to his ideology. Fleming also criticizes FDR based on information that we now know but does not credit FDR for decisions that are supported by similar information. One of Fleming's premises seems to be that we should NOT have fought WWII and, while it is good to re-examine our accepted beliefs, the Nazis WERE bad and had world domination aims, the Japanese WERE expansionists, had brutalized their captives and the rape of Nanking was typical of their subjugation of the countries that they conquered. Germany was technologically superior to Japan and if we'd pursued a Japan first policy Germany's technology might have triumphed. While I do not believe that Roosevelt was pro-Communist I do believe that Fleming correctly portrays Roosevelt's self-delusion about Soviet Russia's aims and its totalitarian methods which we all know were equally as bad as the Nazis. However, FDR was trying to get Stalin to commit to fighting Japan so that the U.S wouldn't have to conduct an invasion against the entire Japanese army. No one knew if the A bomb would be successful. It is also clear that Roosevelt had no clear goals for post-war Europe. This may be attributable to his failing health. If FDR's health was truly as bad as Fleming portrays it (another of his major criticisms of FDR), FDR is to be condemned for his egotism in not stepping down, but almost every politician is an egotist and believes he knows best and will act best. How reputable the author is as an historian is uncertain. He has certainly written many historical books but without going to and reading his citations it is impossible to know how accurate he is. The book is certainly thought provoking and that says a lot.
Rating:
Summary: A Welcome Change
Review: Fleming disagrees with the conventional Wisdom that FDR was a great war President. He says that World War II was approached as an international version of the New Deal. FDR didn't just want to win he wanted to re-shape the world. Fleming believes FDR's insistence on fighting the Germans in North Africa, insisting on unconditional German surrender, ignoring the dangers of communism and specifically trusting Joseph Stalin were major blunders that cost untold lives during and after the war. First, by fighting the Germans in North Africa, FDR made Joe Stalin's encroachment on Eastern Europe all the more easy. Had he instead focused on beating the Japanese and protecting England exclusively, Hitler could have used his entire force to fight Stalin. They would have butchered one another without as many U.S. casualties, and the end result would have been two weakened madmen which would have given Stalin less chance to seize Eastern Europe. Second, although it may not be discussed these days, FDR's insistence of unconditional surrender was quite controversial. No less than Eisenhower himself thought it was a foolish idea, but even more interesting is that it was almost unprecedented in the history of war. Fleming points out that the U.S. (Unconditional Surrender) Grant got the name from his siege at Vicksburg, not the General Lee surrender which was quite cordial and accommodating. Unconditional surrender was a mistake for two reasons says Fleming. It made it much less likely that regular Germans would attempt to overthrow Hitler, because unconditional surrender assumed that all Germans were equally guilty. There were even cables from prominent Germans through neutral Switzerland that tried to negotiate an easier surrender if they offed Hitler, but FDR would have none of it. He blamed the Germans for two world wars and wanted to bring them to their knees. With FDR it was less about Hitler and more about defeating the wicked Huns. The cost was hundreds of thousands of American lives that could have been saved with a more temperate policy. Third, Lauchlin Currie, Senior Administrative assistant to the President, Assistant Secretary of State Harry Dexter White, and State Department officials Alger Hiss and Lawrence Duggan have all been proven spies by the declassified Venona Project. They had access to classified documents and turned them over to other Soviet operatives. Reformed communist, Whitaker Chambers told Assistant Secretary of State Adolf Berle about these men as early as 1939, but when Berle informed FDR, he said it was absurd. FDR always trusted fellow Ivy League men over the evidence, and didn't really see communism as much of a threat anyway. When he met Joesph Stalin during the war, he began calling him Uncle Joe and told confidants that he had "gotten to him" during their discussions. He allowed important meetings that decided post war policy to occur in places like the Soviet embassy in Terhan where every conversation he had was being listened to by the Russians. He even took communist spies like Alger Hiss to the Yalta conferece, where Hiss passed on who knows what information to "Uncle" Joe. Fleming says that all of FDR's mistakes were the result of treating World War II as a social project for the planet. FDR could have beaten the Germans, weakened the Soviets considerably and saved more American lives if his priorities had been winning the war and peace. His more lofty goals of reshaping the world gave him a skewed view of communism and led to the enslavement of Europeans and the deaths of too many Americans. Fleming seems to be on to something here. FDR had his plusses, but the idolatry of Roosevelt has led many people to disregard his grand mistakes. It's nice that Fleming has taken the time to remind us of them.
Rating:
Summary: The Roosevelt Nobody Knows
Review: Imagine the following scenario: The economy is in bad shape after years of poorly conceived policy interventions, and as a result, the general public holds the federal government in disrepute. Suddenly, an attack by foreign enemies on the U.S. galvanizes the nation in support of the political class, thus rejuvenating formerly demoralized public employees and altering the image of the president from a likable man, not known for his mental agility, to a wise statesman in calm control of the nation, a man so obviously dedicated to his responsibilities that he could unilaterally declare "an unlimited national emergency" and be trusted with the power. The president is question is not George W. Bush but Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who knew the effect that Days of Infamy can have on the public's tolerance for statism at home. Historian Thomas Fleming's masterpiece, The New Dealers' War: Franklin D. Roosevelt and the War Within World War II, explains how this-and more-happened sixty years ago, in an outstanding book that sadly became timelier following September 11, 2001. Fleming's picture of FDR is a decidedly less-than-iconic portrait of our thirty-second president, when compared to the image that has been drummed into the national psyche in countless government-funded civics classes since his death in April 1945. Fleming's FDR is driven by a messianic complex and an intense hatred of German history, culture, and people. To appreciate FDR's strong desire for war with Germany, which was so great that he sanctioned one with Japan in order to achieve it, it is important to understand the state of the economy in the years leading up to it. By the midpoint of FDR's second term, the failure of the New Deal policies was evident to all but the truly delusional. The unemployment rate again reached levels associated with the hated Hoover, while the public's tolerance of the pretentious New Dealers and their endless attempts to control the economy waned. Especially humiliating were statistics that showed the United States lagging far behind foreign countries in recovering from the Depression. American national income in 1937 was 85.8 percent of the 1929 high-water mark, while England's was 124.3 percent. Chile, Sweden, and Australia had growth rates in the 20-percent range. The United States figure was a dismal -7.0 percent. The New Deal was exposed as a bad one, and the president's image looked irrevocably tarnished. A disconsolate FDR would confide to his associates his frustrations resulting from his lost political dominance: "[It is] a terrible thing to look over your shoulder when you are trying to lead-and finding no one there" (p. 67). But Roosevelt's political capital was vastly superior to his mental capital (he would joke at times about earning "gentleman's C's" while at Harvard). He knew that the only way he could repair his place in history to fit his own self-image was to lead the country in an unpopular European war, thus necessitating an attempt for an unprecedented third term. Fleming argues, convincingly, that America's entry into the war was crucial for the revival of the New Deal. A group of Republican congressman would tell ex-President Hoover that "the administration was concerned with war not as war but as a method of destroying the present form of government in the United States" (p. 84), while Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio warned that "Entrance into the European War will be the next great New Deal experiment" (p. 87). Several essays meant to rally disenchanted New Dealers fueled these ideas, such as the one written by the archetypal New Dealer Harry Hopkins with the brash title, "The New Deal of Mr. Roosevelt is the Designate and Invincible Adversary of the New Order of Hitler." There is only one way to defeat Hitler, Hopkins would write (p. 85): "By the new order of democracy, which is the New Deal universally extended and applied." Hopkins would (ominously) add that democracy "must wage total war against totalitarian war. It must exceed the Nazi in fury, ruthlessness and efficiency." Apparently, you have to be a totalitarian to beat a totalitarian. (Does the same logic apply for beating terrorism?) There is much, much more in this superb book, including Fleming's description of Henry Wallace-perhaps the weirdest man ever to achieve high office anywhere-and of Roosevelt's revealing devotion to the evil Stalin, resulting in the needless bestowing of Christian Eastern Europe to the Soviet Empire following the war. At one point early in the book, Fleming writes of Harry Truman's opposition to a third term for Roosevelt because his study of history had convinced him no man should be considered indispensable in a republic. This sentiment complements that of Lord Acton, whose famous aphorism ("all power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely") warns against placing too much power in the hands of any individual. The bloody consequences of such concentrations of power were evident throughout the twentieth century. Of course, the timeliness of The New Dealers' War increased following the events of September 11-the present generation's Day of Infamy. Since that date, a rejuvenated Congress has authorized many tens of billions to fight yet another enemy and to fund new layers of government control at home, with the near unanimous support of a shaken public. Meanwhile, the current president has identified the federal government's new role of ridding the world of evil. It would appear that support for the government is once again high, in marked contrast to the divided nation that was revealed during the 2000 election. It must be fun again to be in public service. Thomas Fleming reminds us that we have gone down this road before. What we gained was an overweening state and what we lost were many of the liberties that should be the most treasured of all values. The wise among us will heed the lesson.
Rating:
Summary: Eye Opening Expose' of FDR and the New Dealers
Review: In these times where Presidential "Greatness" lists are appearing fairly often, Mr. Fleming has turned a microscope on a President that regularly rates on these lists near the top. What is revealed in this carefully researched book puts a serious question to FDR's high ranking. Mr. Fleming has approached FDRs presidency with an open mind and brought a fresh insight to both the minor as well as the major events and policies of this most tumultous time. Fleshing out in great detail the key players of the New Deal provided this reader with a better understanding on how they interacted/inter-related with FDR and each other. What I learned was both eye opening and disturbing, particularly FDR and his many subordinates appeasement and accomodation of Stalin, and the level of communist infiltration of his administration. Having read Robert Ferrell's book on FDRs last year and the cover-up of his grave ill health prepared me to understand how it related to the larger context of WWII as outlined in this book. The book is well written and the prose will allow the reader to easily become immersed in a very important subject. I applaud Mr. Fleming for a job well done and highly recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Thank God for Harry Truman!
Review: The Second World War is surrounded by a popular mythology: that of The Last Good War, fought by The Greatest Generation, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt as its avuncular leader, who assured the American people in upbeat fireside chats that all they had to fear was fear itself. Trusted and beloved because his New Deal had pulled the country out of the Great Depression, his only critics were "economic royalists" and "isolationists" of implicitly crypto-Nazi sympathy. Thomas Fleming, in "The New Dealers' War," explodes one after another of these clichés. The New Deal failed to bring America back to prosperity. Our economy lagged behind recovery in the rest of the industrialized world. Roosevelt was elected on the Democratic ticket by a ramshackle coalition of southerners (who remembered that Lincoln and Grant were Republicans), big-city machine politicians (largely Irish-Catholic), labor unions (ranging from rather conservative trades unions to the Communist-tinged CIO), and left-wing intelligentsia types (many of whom looked to the Soveit Union as a moral model). These disparate constituencies were at war with each other almost from the start. Roosevelt mastered them because he was a consummate trimmer, and had instinctual charm and an ability to sense who could be useful to him. As Fleming amply documents, he ruthlessly disposed of subordinates and supporters when expediency demanded, despite their often touchingly naïve loyalty to him. These tactics began to wear thin as Roosevelt's second term drew to a close. Some New Deal measures had proven oppressive and unpopular, not just to big-business "economic royalists" that Roosevelt (himself a scion of inherited wealth) loved to disparage, but amongst farmers and shopkeepers. Southern Democrats grew restive and often allied themselves with Republican conservatives. As Roosevelt sought to take a more active rôle in the brewing European war, "isolationist" sentiment brewed not only among Republicans, but among liberals like Sen. Burton K. Wheeler (D., Mont.). After Pearl Harbor, war policy became a battlefield contested between those who focused purely on military goals, and liberal New Dealers who saw it as a means to extend the New Deal, with its aims of "economic democracy," to the entire world in a coming "Century of the Common Man." Principal among them was the teetotalling vegetarian Vice President Henry A. Wallace. Antagonists to the New Dealers included Jesse Jones, the Secretary of Commerce, numerous members of Congress, "dollar-a-year" men from big business corporations, and Democratic party leaders outside Washington. Roosevelt rode herd on the lot of them using his usual techniques, and was able to maintain what he most desired - his personal dominance. Roosevelt's usual methods of trimming and playing both ends against the middle were not as successful with foreign politicians like Churchill and Stalin. Roosevelt frustrated the former and was bamboozled by the latter. As the Venona decrypts show, the Soviets were successful in infiltrating the highest levels of the Roosevelt administration. Roosevelt was oblivious to this and wilfully turned a blind eye to Soviet treachery, deceit, and inhumanity - sending to Samoa, for example, the Navy liaison officer who brought him the news that the Polish army officer corps had been massacred at Katyn by the Russians. In this rosy view of the Soviets, Roosevelt was encouraged by Wallace and left-wing aides like Harold Ickes. Those who believe World War II was a moralistic crusade against Nazi inhumanity will be startled to read of Roosevelt's rôle in suppressing news of Nazi genocide for fear of feeding suspicion that the Allies were fighting "the Jews' war." Roosevelt also ignored considerable resistance to Hitler at the highest levels of the German military. Encouraged by his leftist New Dealer advisors, he believed that aristocratic militarists and "Prussian Junkers" were responsible for the ongoing war, just as Allied propaganda placed them behind World War I. In fact, the German nobility loathed Hitler. The regular officer corps, largely drawn from this class, regarded him as a disastrous commander who wasted the lives of their troops. Many had seen at first hand the atrocities committed by the SS in the rear guard of the eastern front. Honorable men and devout Christians amongst them - officers like Canaris, Witzleben, Stülpnagel, and Rommel - were sickened, and plotted constantly to depose or assassinate Hitler. Roosevelt rejected all efforts on the part of these decent Germans to communicate with the Allies. The policy of "unconditional surrender" and the publicity given the vindictive Morgenthau plan in the war's last months were highly counterproductive and served only to prolong fighting.
On the home front, Harry Truman, who had obtained re-election to the Senate without assistance from Roosevelt, was making a reputation for himself as a watchdog over the war effort, exposing waste and boodling by corrupt bureaucrats, contractors, and labor unionists. The machinations leading up to the dumping of Wallace and the nomination of Truman for Vice President in 1944 are fascinating to read. Roosevelt's usually successful trimming seems in this case to have spilt over into painful vacillation. He probably sympathized at his deepest level with the rhapsodic leftism of Wallace, but was shrewd enough ro realize Wallace would have been a liability to the ticket. He did not so much select Truman as his running mate, as he allowed him to be selected. Truman's success at the convention was a very near thing. Fleming's account is a worthwhile record of the days when nominating conventions had a substantial function instead of being publicity events as they are today. This book is not a reactionary Roosevelt-hater's polemic. The clear hero in it is no right-wing Republican, but Harry Truman - a pragmatic liberal and a canny politician who was at the same time a man of integrity and sound judgment. Most importantly, Truman harbored no illusions about communism. The nation - and the world - should be undyingly grateful for that.
Rating:
Summary: A reexamination of FDR and his presidential policies
Review: The underlying conventional belief is that the United States entered WWII as a direct result of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Thomas Fleming's book "The New Dealers' War" makes a credible argument for the case that the attack on Pearl Harbor was carefully orchestrated by FDR and his interventionist administration to get America into the war. Fleming bases his argument on a number of key points that he painstakingly documents throughout his book. The cornerstone of his argument is based upon the revelation of a document known as Rainbow Five. The document revealed that FDR had plans to create a 10 million man army for the purpose of invading Europe in 1943 and defeating the Nazi war machine. Fleming maintains that the existence of Rainbow Five was deliberately revealed by FDR himself with the intention of having Germany declare war on the United States. At that time, Americans had strong pro-Eruopean sentiments and favored aid to the allies but they stopped short of supporting direct US involvement in the escalating war. The book maintains that FDR lacked the political strength to sway public opinion in support of the war so he masterminded a series of events and policies that resulted in the attack on Pearl Harbor and the eventual declaration of war against the United States by Germany. Whether or not Roosevelt intentionally manipulated people and events to achieve such a result remains unproven but this book does and exceptional job of examining the political climate of the time. Roosevelt's leadership during the depression is shown to be particularly magnificent. His mentality that traditional government mechanisms were inadequate led to the creation of a series of alphabet soup federal agencies that were designed to intervene in the economic crises. The "New Deal" itself was a balanced mixture of both pragmatism and Idealism. Having the ideology is one thing but implementing these ideas into practical programs required the skills of a master politician such as FDR. The shortcomings of Roosevelt's foreign policy program are magnified and examined in close detail but one comes away with a strong appreciation of the complex circumstances which he faced on the world stage. "The New Dealers' War" certainly provides numerable thought provoking questions that inspire conjecture but it comes across as an excellent work of narrative history.
Rating:
Summary: When The Legend Conflicts With The Truth, Print The Truth
Review: There have been many excellent reviews already written about this remarkable book and all of them are worth your time. I, for may part, would just like to add this coda, quoted directly from the book itself, and a passage that I believe speaks volumes about America at war: "Meanwhile, the mixture of memory and history that constituted America's vision of World War II underwent a remarkable transformation. Forgotten were the reluctance to take up arms, the double-talk Franklin D. Roosevelt used to conceal is intention to make war on Germany -- revealed so graphically in the leak of Rainbow Five - and the provocative politics that lured Japan into the attack on Pearl Harbor. Also lost to memory was the ferocious antagonism between Roosevelt and Congress. Perhaps most forgotten were the consequences of the policy of unconditional surrender and the hateful tactics it legitimized, terror bombing of civilians and the use of the atomic bomb.
Instead, the deepening realization of Hitler's campaign of extermination against the Jews, which only a few Americans understood during the war, justified in many people's minds unconditional surrender, the ruthless air war, and even the atomic bomb. The global conflict slowly became the Good War, something that few of its participants would have called it at the time." Does this sound familiar? And yet it has been the underpinning of every American entry into war since (and including) the American Revolution. Reading this book made me shudder as to what might have happened if, say, we were not so successful in winning this war. Suppose it had bogged down over seven to eight years? And what if FDR, in spite of his chicanery, was not as resolute in pursuing his goal? FDR's only failure in handling the war came back to haunt his successor, Truman: the underestimation of Joseph Stalin. FDR though he could win Stalin over by dint of his forceful personality, the way he had with so many others. Fleming does a great job of pointing out the ability of Harry Truman in not only bringing peace, but in keeping the balance of power. Were it not for Truman's realization of the facts after Potsdam, Stalin might well have ended up as the hands-down winner. Keeping Stalin out of Japan turned out in retrospect to be one of the crucial events of the war. Fleming does every historian and would-be historian a solid turn by taking World War II from the clouds of myth and grounding it firmly in reality. One other note: the book's writing style is such that it is a sheer pleasure to read, which I attribute to the fact Fleming is also an accomplished novelist and thus has a way of making dry facts palatable to the mind. A must-have for anyone interested in American history.
Rating:
Summary: a real eye-opener
Review: This book is a real eye-opener, a book that uncovers the shocking lies, deceit, and betrayal that went on under FDR during WWII. Meticulously footnoted, the book offers irrefutable proof of FDR's cunning as a master of propaganda and political intrigue. You will learn how: -- FDR's declared policy of unconditional surrender (against the advice of all of his chief of staff and all historical precedent) prolonged the war unnecessarily, costing hundreds of thousands of American soldiers' lives; -- How FDR kept secret from the American people and his own staff, the existence of a German underground movement to overthrow Hitler, the "Front of Decent People", and how its leaders, Admiral Canaris and General Rommel, pleaded with FDR to help them destroy the Nazi regime from within, but they were rebuffed by FDR because FDR wanted and needed to war to not end quickly.
-- How FDR's ill-advised "unconditional surrender" policy caused a two month delay of the Italian armistice, giving the Nazis those weeks to establish defenses in Italy, evetually resulting in the deaths of 200,000 U.S. and Allied soldiers. -- How the Bureau of Economic Warfare, set up by FDR, became a tool for the expansion of world socialism, and how it wasted billions in a failed attempt to grow rubber trees in South America instead of investing in U.S. technology for the development of synthetic rubber needed for the war effort. -- How FDR used race riots over segregation in the South in 1943 for his own political gain, and never spoke out against or did anything to end segregation. -- How FDR knew about the Holocaust, but the German people did not, yet FDR declined to inform the German people about it through a leaflet dropping campaign. FDR also concealed his knowledge of the Holocause from his cabinet and the American people. FDR could have saved millions of lives by shining the light of day on the issue, but didn't. -- How FDR encouraged virulent anti-Japanese racism in the U.S. -- How, despite his public denials, FDR promoted the extremely controversial targeted bombing of civilian population centers as a war tactic (calling it "terror bombing"), indiscriminately killing hundreds of thousands of innocent noncombatants in cities such as Dresden and Berlin. -- How FDR promoted the lie that "religious freedom" existed in Stalinist Russia, while knowing that it was untrue. -- How FDR kept to himself knowldege that Stalin murdered 10 million farmers in Russia in 1932-33, rather than reveal it to the American public, because he believed so wholeheartedly in Stalin's communism. -- How FDR enthusiasticaly endorsed the Communist propaganda book, "Mission to Moscow", which described life in Stalinist Russia in the most absurdly glowing terms, and ordered it made into a movie, even as Russians were at the time starving to death by the millions. -- How FDR knew all along about the Katyn Massacre (Stalin's murder of 10,000 Polish officers), but quashed all news about it so that the American people did not learn about it until decades later. When photographic written proof of the massacre came in to FDR in 1943, FDR ordered it stashed in a warehouse. -- How in November 1943, FDR secretly endorsed the idea of disarming France, turning it into a puppet state after the war, and of promoting a communist takeover by Stalin of India. -- How FDR was indifferent to the post-war spread of communism in Europe. -- How at his meeting with Stalin atTeheran, FDR "consented to Stalin's demand for most of eastern Poland, asling only that his approval be kept quiet until after the 1944 elections, lest it cost him votes among Polish Americans...[FDR] seemed utterly indifferent to Poland's contribution to the war effort. The Poles had the fourth largest number of men under arms on the Allied side of the war. Moreover, they produced no Nazi puppet government nor any collaborators. Yet Roosevelt's sympathy for Poland was as nonexistent as his support." -- How FDR became an apologist for the Chinese Communists. the Chinese ambassador tried to warn about the Chicom brutality but was ignored. ••••
I could go on, but it would take a book-length list. It will be much better for you to get the book yourself. Further, I will caution you to ignore the cries of "lies, lies" by this book's detractors, most of whom have never even read the book despite their claims to the contrary. Theirs are nothing but a knee-jerk reactions to defend their ideological hero. Read this book, you will not regret it!
| 
