Harrison

The Generals does a good job of summing key army generals of the past 75 years. Thee sections pre Gulf War seem well researched. Where I begin to question the book is during the 1991 Gulf War and after. The sources used are a bit too close to the issues under discussion to be objective. Add to that the idea of armchair generalship when people like Spyder Marks and Barry Mcafree are quoted who seem to revel in critiquing wars on major networks; this section must be taken a large grain of salt. That being said the book seems to be a good starting point for further investigation

The Author pushes the idea of command relief throughout the book. While, a worthy idea it is unrealistic to expect it to be put in place any time soon. The evidence presented does cry out for greater accountability among the general staff.

The Narration is perfectly ordinary but I recommend taking the book in small sections, otherwise one person quickly bleeds into the next

Cut & Run is unexpected jewel.it features Ty and Zane two veteran FBI agents who have very different ways of solving cases. Ty is all instinct and hunches while Zane is all antithetical and logical. the mystery itself is good but at its core this is a book about two people and what happens between them. The authors have a way of making Ty and /Zane seem real. one thing i do like is that both are flawed. Too often in books about two people one is portrayed as a paragon, that is certainly not the case here. I also enjoyed the fact that both men know who they are. Sure their is as element of is he really into me, but both men know themselves. one other thing of note is the humor very few series can make laugh out loud like this one can.

the narration is near perfect for this kind of book and i wish he had stayed around to narrate the rest of the series. I don't find that Sean Criden is nearly as engaging. (he reads books 3 and 4)

In short the series has become an auto buy for me even though dreamspiiner press has stopped releasing the series in audio, it continues in ebook or paperback. take note that Abigail Roux took over sole authorship in 2012.

I had high hopes for this book given reviews i had read elsewhere. Sadly for me the book just fell flat for me. the mystery was very much run of the mill, almost caned and picked off a shelf. i felt a distinct lack of empathy for the people in the book. I didn't actively dislike any just could not relate to them on an emotional level perhaps It's just a mark of the noir vibe the author was going for but I detected a note of smugness through out the work like Lanyon was toying with reader it felt at some points like he was trying to give a lecture in detective fiction. after thinking about it, much of the praise for the comes from the fact the protagonist is gay and not for the quality of the work itself;

the narration like the rest if the book is nothing memorable

OK we all love a guilty pleasure. my expectations for this book were relatively low and by the end i wish they had been lower by the end. The people have no real depth show no real growth and live in fairy tale land. Jake and Nate have known each other their whole lives and known they have loved each other just never admitted it to each other they are so perfect, if you think about it too hard the reader may gag. The only redeeming quality are what I'm going to dub the "love scenes" they are hot, but as far as a piece of literature it is just awful

Like many I fell in love with Urban and Roux thanks to the cut and run series. This work feels like a High School attempt at a novel. They use stereo types as the basis for their characters and as result they have no depth. Roux in particular has since developed a biting wit and sarcasm that makes me laugh out loud. This trait has become even more apparent in her solo work. Unfortunately this work shows none of that.
The narration is like the rest of the work is completely forgettable.
The book is ok just not memorable in any way and i will most likely forget I own it a year from now

Writing this review is very hard. I lived in Saudi Arabia for 10 years and was eager to read the sections on Abdual Aziaz early conquest of the kingdom and the dealings with I'quan, especially since the later topic was almost a taboo topic among the generation of Saudis old enough to remember them The book also does a good job at explaining the pivital role played the late king Fisal, love him or hate him he is critical to any history of the kingdom.

The problems with the book are two fold.the first is with the text, it almost too detailed. the names often run together even though I knew the major players I found myself rewinding and having trouble keeping track of who was being talked about. the second problem is the narration Fredrick Davidson reads in a dry laconic style which with a book this long it can become dull to listen for long periods.

While the the book was good and informative I find it hard to recommend the book to wide audience given the esoteric nature of the topic but for those interested in the kingdom this book is full of good tidbits and follows a logical pattern but for those looking for an introduction I recommend Lacy's 2009 follow up to this book inside the kingdom

John Q Adams was the last of a generation. I know he wasn't part of the founding generation but with the impact his parents and family friends like Jefferson left on him he may as well have been . He fought as a senator, diplomat, secretary of state, president, and member of the house of representatives for what he felt were the best national interest, largely regardless of party.

As for the book itself it was very uneven the author spent what seemed like large amounts of time describing how Adams would get somewhere and then just give very basic overview of what he did when there. The book seems to lack balance, the author seems to brush of criticism of Adams by simply saying but Adams did what he felt was right. this gives one a good look at one point of view but left me wondering what the other side thought, simply because they were dismissed in about one line. All in all the book is good but I take what was said with a large grain of salt.

The Narration of the book is okay, nothing to write home about. One thing that got to me was the pronunciation of some French words was awful. I realize being able to speak French my ear can pick these things up more easily but one would think given the role French played in the subject's life that more of an effort might have been made

the saving grace of this book is the narration Ellen Archer is very good.

my problems with the book are its too long i easily skipped a third of book and still perfectly understood what was going on. also she seems to have taken up the trend of writing from multiple points of view this is almost a direct response to the A Song of Ice and Fire series. those are told from eight different points of view. this only works if it done well she is no George R.R. Martin she barrows from too many genre conventions an ancient enemy returns only one can fight it yada yada yada. perhaps the death nail comes from the lack of growth all the people stay the same. the trick too good fantasy is to make you want to stay in the world and she doesn't do that.

First of all let me say I loved Rowan Speedwell's other audiobook Finding Zach it was such a refreshing change from most of the other male/male fiction out there. So it was with high hopes I started Kindred Harts. the good thing is Speedwell still manages to draw a complex main person who is dealing with real issues. the bad news is I just could not find myself sympathizing or even empathizing with anyone in this book. I mean don't we all wish we had Tristan's issues he is smart good looking seems to have a matural ability in almost every field he enters and oh yes he is rich too. The idea that the love of his life just falls into his lap was just too much. By all accounts Tristan is a likeable guy who is just very lonely. I found myself asking if he is liked by almost everyone why is Charles the first person to show him kindness. it was this theme along with a contrived plot that made me almost stop listening several times.

I will give Speedwell's work another try because of her first triuph but this book was a great let down for me.

Founding Brothers is simply one of the best books out there one the revolutionary era. Joseph J Ellis should be given the highest honors for his mastery of the art of narrative history. Many of us who love this period have often wanted to be a fly on the wall at events like Jefferson's " dinner party" and this book gives the audience that chance. the thing that struck me mist about the work was Ellis's idea that only now after more than 200 years are we as a nation having a "grown up conversation" about the founding generation. Much of the blame for this he lays at the feet of his fellow historians, who either deify or vilify the men in question. the men described were very complex and together they manged to pull together something the world had not seen work on such a scale since Roman times.

Much of the criticism for the book comes from the fact he spends a long time setting up the events he describes.Ii will admit that in some cases this is a valid point. However, a historian should lay his or her case well before getting to their argument. Another point in favor of this stylistic choice is that the book is written for a general audience who the author assumes is largely unfamiliar with the details of the events he is about to describe.

Nelson Runger as always is excellent with tone and pacing