Rating: 
Summary: Moral Equivalence - Bradley style
Review: I cried when I read Flags of Our Fathers. The stories in Flyboys are compelling, but the author gets in the way.James Bradley's story of his father and the other Iwo Jima flagraisers was remarkably free of the author's own biases. Flyboys is not. Mr. Bradley seeks to establish moral equivalence between Japanese and American pre-war behavior for about 100 pages before he gets to the supposed core of the book. He has a very Nippon-centric view of the world, and he seems particularly solicitous of Hirohito, recounting the young emperor's upbringing in a militaristic environment as though that excused the later atrocities committed in his name. This book should not be marketed as though it were a sequel to Flags of Our Fathers. It is at its heart an anti-war, even an anti-American book. While it praises individual pilots, it puts much of teh blame for the commencement of World War II on the U.S., with great sympathy shown for the Japanese. Save your money. Get it from the library if you must, but don't expect the drama and objectivity shown in Flags of Our Fathers.
Rating: 
Summary: Agree with many others
Review: I think this book could have been much better and more historically appealing. Too much Japanese bashing in the first 150 or so pages. This is not the topic nor the theme. Anyone who knows anything at all about WWII would already be aware of what the Japanese did to people. Maybe this approach was a ploy to get the readers excited about the Flyboys doing their job and getting even. If so, this was a bad ploy. Perhaps Mr. Bradley should have intereviewed more people to get some better prime source material to validate the book's title.
Rating:
Summary: A Compelling Story That Needs Telling--Only Poorly Presented
Review: Having thoroughly enjoyed James Bradley's well-written book about Iwo Jima, "Flags of Our Fathers," I picked up a copy of his newest book, "Flyboys," soon after it first became available. Without doubt, the central story of "Flyboys" (the Japanese army's butchery of 8 American POWs on the remote island of Chichi Jima and the narrow escape of then Navy pilot George Bush) is a compelling one and deserves the attention that the new book brings to it. The disappointment is that this book is far more diffuse and less focussed than the earlier Bradley book, and has some rather troublesome biases. (Perhaps this indicates that Bradley's co-author on the earlier book was more instrumental to its success than I had realized.) Because of the lack of focus, the portrayals of the 8 American POWs who were killed by the Japanese is far less captivating than that of the flag-raisers at Iwo Jima in Bradley's earlier book. "Flyboys" offers important insights into the American-Japanese confrontation in the Pacific, going all the way back to Commodore Matthew Perry's "opening" of Japan to America in the 1850s. Reflecting the influence of John Dower, author of the Pulitzer-Prize-winning "Embracing Defeat" and a former professor of Bradley's, this book provides a sensitive analysis of the central influences that affected Japanese-American relations both prior to and during World War II. Besides its lack of focus, perhaps the most disappointing aspect of "Flyboys" is Bradley's rather tortured attempt to give balance to his presentation by likening Japanese atrocities to the darker side of America's and her allies' behavior in the war. Certainly, neither side was blameless, but Bradley seems to overlook Japan's culpability in attacking Pearl Harbor, in committing racist barbarism toward the civilian populations of China and Korea, and in its unparalleled atrocities against Allied POWs. Less bothersome but still objectionable is the rather strange slant Bradley's narrative presents on some major historic figures. He keeps referring to FDR as "the Dutchman"--a term I've never seen any other historian use--and insists on calling Gen. Curtis LeMay "Curtis" throughout the narrative. All in all, the book is worth reading, but hardly measures up to "Flags of Our Fathers" and the other recent tours de force on World War II (including Hampton Sides' "Ghost Soldiers," Michael Beschloss's "The Conquerors," and Iris Chang's "The Rape of Nanking").
Rating:
Summary: Can we get to the supposed subject of the book someday?
Review: Aaaaaggghh! I am about 1/3rd of the way through the book now and I came to read these reviews to see if everyone else was getting the same feeling I was while reading "Flyboys." I wish I'd read them before I bought this book because most of the stuff in these reviews is right on. I thought I was buying a good story about the "Flyboys" who launched a raid against Chichi Jima. The dust jacket deceptively makes it sound as if that is what you're buying. Instead, I've suffered through 141 pages so far, consisting almost totally of James Bradley's reinterpretation of history in an attempt to suggest that American brutality was just as bad as Japanese brutality. The tone is almost unbearable. Even his own examples don't make his case well at all, but one senses a constant attempt to get his misguided point across. I can hardly take it anymore and I may have to ditch this book. Based on the dust jacket, I feel like I've gotten a total bait-and-switch with this book. I guess he wants to make the "America was just as brutal as Japan" case at all costs and knew he wouldn't sell many books if he was honest about that being the topic. Next time, stick to the story at hand, James, like Hampton Sides did in Ghost Soldiers. Now that was a good read with an interesting story and I didn't have to suffer along the way.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Story, But Bias Seeps In Early
Review: I have to admit I am only about a third through the book by now, like one other reviewer, and this is a truly fascinating story. James Bradley does a good job of delving into the history of the Pacific, air power, the rise of the US, the rise of Japan, etc. all to set the stage for WWII. I was previously unaware of how interlinked these events were. But already the depths to which he goes to bookend even the slaughter of 30million chinese at the hands of Japanese with stories of American massacres against Indians and Filipinos, -and bogus comparisons to being greater than the deaths caused by Germany and Italy to boot- show a lazy intellectual dishonesty. Having read a bit more in depth about the US in the Philippines he has taken the true stories of the worst American attrocities there and painted them as the norm even though they were not. Building schools, roads and hospitals where none previously existed was a very large part of the US occupation that is conveniently left out. And it is flat out incorrect to state that American torture exceeded Spanish torture, because it didn't, even though it was sadly too common. He also tries far too hard to link nearly every act of Japanese brutality and aggressivenes to American treatment of the American Indian, which becomes a tired and futile exercise after a while. It's just disappointing and taints an otherwise great story told in Bradley's very easy, flowing and human technical style. There is indeed a large difference between a nation that has liberated most of the nations it fought in and actively strived to rebuild those it damaged in war versus one that has conquered every nation it fought in and pillaged to a degree unseen before or since in the history of war. I like Bradley and loved Flags of Our Fathers. Having just graduated UCLA I can only hope this is a well intentioned but misguided effort by him to fit in with modern academia, which has become a leftist, lazy and intellectually dishonest blame America club that falsely paints the world as idyllic and peaceful and prosperous everywhere until America rears its "ugly head." There is no moral distinction made between any civilization, and ridiculous comparisons must be made to make them all look equally responsible for WWII. Since the writing style is good and the story is so interesting reading this book has been like watching William Van Allen come up with the beauty of the Chrysler building, painstakingly adorn its details in Art Deco style, and then paint the whole thing hot pink with yellow, brown and orange polka dots.
Rating:
Summary: Good story but trying to rewrite history!
Review: James Bradley is a pretty good writer and he gives a fascinating and detailed account of the U.S. Navy flyers who were captured and murdered on the Japanese-held island of Chichi Jima during World War II. [P>All-in-all, this is a worthwhile read for history buffs, especially those interested in WWII in the Pacific theater. It would have been much better if the author didn't keep flashing back to some American atrocity, as if he was trying to give a balanced, objective view. His idiotic comparisons of Japan and the United States were neither balanced or objective.
Rating: 
Summary: IN WAR, EVERYONE LOOSES
Review: In FLYBOYS James Bradley has dealt with all participants of the battles in the Pacific in World War II with sympathy and brutal honesty . I was a child at the time with a 'Flyboy" older brother, a West Point cadet, who died in a training crash of one of the unpredictable early combat airplanes Mr. Bradley described. After reading of the fate of pilots who survived training, I realize by brother's fate could have been even harsher. FLYBOY is not just a recital of events, but a search into the human involvement and influence of those events. Repeatedly both victims and perpetrators blamed war as the cause allowing individuals to commit atrocities and as a reason for victims to forgive their abusers. Former President Bush was one of the Flyboys who was miraculously rescued from capture and icy waters by a submarine crew. Having lost his two crewmen and having had a close brush with death, he lived the horror of war. It is unfathomable to me how one, who lived through this and later had children, could possibly, from a position of great power, allow another war to destroyed innocent people and put others' sons and daughters in harms' way. Perhaps this is an extension of many of the Flyboys reasoning that they were doing a job that had to be done. The Flyboys did their job well, as did James Bradley. It is a shocking story that needed telling, so we may someday cease to live such stories.
Rating:
Summary: Bradley no repeat
Review: While Flags of Our Fathers was outstanding, Flyboys misses the mark in all categories. Bradley's research is questionable because there are so many factual errors. Sadly his liberal, bleeding heart bias pours out as he whines about America's treatment of Native Americans in the 19th century. SAVE YOUR MONEY! Flyboys is a STINKER!!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Not for the nationalists or WWII trivia buffs
Review: I agree with some earlier posts here about some inaccuracies in Bradleys facts. I can over look these however because any one looking for a factual, historical account of the war in the Pacific would probably recognize right away that this book does not fall into that category. I found this book to be well written engaging and thought provoking... but.... Those looking for a gushing portrait of US war heroes should look elsewhere. Judging from the cover and the brief descriptions I read before buying this book, I'd say that is exactly the type of reader they're shooting for. Although I found that the pilots' stories were treated with care and found nothing in this book to detract from their heroism and bravery, the simple fact is that you can't tell a war story from the point of view of opposing sides and then bill it as a testament to a particular nations heroes. I think most people would agree on two things: first that war and expansionism whether American or Japanese or any nations, is atrocious (read: will include atrocities on both sides), and second that despite the atrocities that inevitably accompany every war effort, there are times where pacifism is equally if not more reprehensible. So in my mind there is no conflict with acknowledging the horrors of WWII - including those inflicted on our enemies - and being proud of the role the US played and the bravery of our soldiers. The problem in this book isn't that it's wrong to try and understand the actions and motivations of Japan - or even to find a way to equate them morally or civilly to the United States, it's that all of that objective reasoning ought to be in a completely separate book. When writing a tribute to a war hero you have the emotions of an entire nation to consider. The fire-bombing in Japan should be a footnote to the story to help explain the overall sentiment the Japanese soldiers would have had towards American pilots. On the flip side, the account of this tragedy ought to be just a footnote in an objective detached account of the Pacific war. If you want to look at it from both sides, it's best to leave your emotions at the door - If you want to get emotional about your heroes, you'd better stick to your side.
Rating:
Summary: Sad disregard of the planes they flew
Review: Bradley effectively documents Japanese atrocities, but shows virtually no understanding of the planes his "Flyboys" lived and died in. Corsairs, Helldivers, Avengers, Mitchells, and so on played vital roles in their crews' existence, each with its own combination of strengths and weaknesses. Bradley's aseptic descriptions of air combat fail to evoke these dynamic, visceral marriages of man and machine. Ironically, SBD Dauntless dive bombers appearing in the beautiful photographs on the jacket and flyleaves are identified nowhere in the text and were apparently flown by none of the main characters in this book. The Dauntless dominated most of the crucial Pacific naval battles with its unique combination of range, maneuverability, and toughness, but was being supplanted by the faster (but clumsier and less forgiving) Helldiver by the time Chichi Jima was attacked. Far better treatments of the Pacific air war exist.
| 
