Tom Clancy's "The Bear and the Dragon"

[Ender Wiggin]

I finished reading the book took me about 1 year because I gave up 2/3's of the way through and only picked it up again a week ago. The characterization of the Chinese leadership seems entirely cookie-cutterwise. The actual war scenario seems rigged from the beginning and unrealistic if this book was written in the year 2000 or based on it.

A) The 1991 "Iraq/Iran War" had a drastic effect on the Chinese in real life, the PLA went though the most drastic military reorganization ever undertaken by a military power in history as a result of America's beating of Iraq. In Tom's world Iran and Iraq unified under a religious leader and was nevertheless similarily crushed by the US in 1991 thus the same thing should've happened, and the PLA would've been far more modern and able to fight a war.

B) The PLAAF was trashed by inferior numbers of American F-14/16's no mention of the F-35 which utilized AWAAC's to help missiles lock onto PLAAF assets etc. And thus the PLAAF probly lost some 500 planes tops by the time the war ended and the US at most lost some 10 planes... at most.

The problem with this is that its impossible PERIOD. A friend who attends Harvard has a roommate is the son of a Joint Chief of Staff's whose reply to what he thought of B&D was to laugh and say they can't do that. Then there's the common sense factor. Even with upgrades America's current F-14's/16's are still old compared to the SU-27's and SU-30's currently in service during the book.

C) The USAF knocked out 6 bridges in the Harbin Wei railroad network to decapitate the PLA's supplylines in Russia, believeable if it weren't for the fact that the PLA's AA and FLAK defences should've been more then enough to knock the fighter bombers, China's radar systems are not Iraq's.

D) The US utilized UAV's to see in real time the position of the PLA units and coordinate the Russian/US defences in siberia seeing everything that the PLA can do. However assuming that the book was written with 2000 in mind, I know that the PLA had UAV's in 1994. Thus they should've been able to likewise see what the Russian's/Americans can do.

E) Clancy spoke of the majority of Chinese citizens wearing Mao suits, spoke of how in China everything looks good only from a distance and how "horrible" the food is. I know otherwise from the oversea's Chinese students here in Canada that the cities are beatiful places, the food is good, and instead of say in the 60's with the streets filled with PLA soldiers the cities are bustling metrolpolices filled with tourists, citizens and corporate logos and brands etc. The 1950's view of China is extremely annoying.


Though they're are some saving graces, he did a balanced view of the Politburo of those who are progressive and those who are hardliner as far as an outsider can tell but he still paints the picture that even progressive chinese leadership is somehow corrupt in some way, a second Tienamen square and a subsequent change in government is believeable "if" China went into a losing war and if it was the fault of a few elite members of the politburo.

I liked the Russian subplot the most since it was reasonable all the way through and a fun read but almsot every other part of the book was bland or somehow talored to make it look like America can't lose a war.

Now what else did I not like... ah yes it was a freaking sermon almost every 5 pages, about how "Communism is evil this" or "Communism failed that" c'mon can this guy make no distinction between true communism and the mockery of Stalinist Socialist Totalitarianism? Then there's the economic view, Tom Clancy wrote this book with 2000 in mind yet has no idea how badly America would be hurt if it suddenly decided to stop trading with China the economic whiplash would've caused a recission(sp?). Back to charractitures, he paints the Chinese leadership as uncompronmising and foolhardy, unlogical etc etc, yet if you look at similar trading disputes recently in the news today the PRC has been compromizing and cooperative with everything.

Also predictibility, every plotline had a purpose and I could geuss from the development of wach one what it could do, I knew that the training of spetsnaz woiuld be used to take out the nucleare silo's I knew the reason to have the AEGIS cruisers get better software was to take down the one or 2 missiles that of course escape and get launched. Tom even gives hints to point towards that its the Baptist and the Priest that become the reason why the war begins. Everything is predictable though the very ending of it was satisfactory at least. As far as I can tell with the ending of the book is basically the Chinese unilarery withdraw and offer to pay reparations and the politboru "elitists" are arrested and the progresssive members form a knew government with some of the student leaders who go to Tianemen Square.

The overal book is poor and barely worth 1 star but at least the ending isnt half bad.

Anyone else read the book and have some thoughts?

[AssassinsMace]

You know the rumor is that Tom Clancy had a ghost writer in the beginning and that's why those books were better than his laters works that were written by himself?

Tom Clancy is loon. He knows how to talk but only if his facts were just as good. I saw him on CNN promoting this book. He was asked were did he get his information that China was planning to invade into Russia. He said, " The Mongols did it!" Can you imagine how you can apply that same logic to the US with Nazi Germany?

[crazyinsane105]

That book was sooooooooo horrible it wasn't even funny. When I was in high school, it was my favorite book because of my ignorance. However, ever since I started to know about politics and military weapons, my contempt for Tom Clancy has soared through the roof. And in the book, there was absolutely no mention of the Sunburn or Klub missiles. On top of that, the previous book called Executive Order, it portrayed the Americans as being militarily capable enough take on and smash a unified Iran and Iraq. Well, right now the US can't even manage a divided Iraq so how it will manage to take on Iran, much less a unified Iran and Iraq?

[petty officer1]

The sad truth is the books is based on china in1960s.

For most american, (including me 10 years ago:o ) like to think china as a backward, communist fanatic country.
After living In the city of Kumming for 2 month, China is not half bad.

To all the writer out ther, next time write book, Do a little research.;)

[Ender Wiggin]

Did anyone read Debt of Honour? The plot for that one though looks interesting what does anyone think of it? (I havent read it yet)

[vincelee]

the one where Japan fights America.....stay away from Clancy. The only good book I've ever seen by that moron is Red Storm Rising, and that's because the entire scenario was wargamed out with a true professional. I forgot his name though.

[AssassinsMace]

The sad truth is the books is based on china in1960s.

For most american, (including me 10 years ago:o ) like to think china as a backward, communist fanatic country.
After living In the city of Kumming for 2 month, China is not half bad.

To all the writer out ther, next time write book, Do a little research.;)

Ever see that TV show? I think it was called "The Agency." They had people in China living straw huts in the middle of the jungle.

[AssassinsMace]

the one where Japan fights America.....stay away from Clancy. The only good book I've ever seen by that moron is Red Storm Rising, and that's because the entire scenario was wargamed out with a true professional. I forgot his name though.

Larry Bond? I think he was Clancy's ghost writer.

[crazyinsane105]

Agreed. Red Storm Rising is the only good book by Tom Clancy. All of his other books are complete garbage. What is even more outrageous is that he was also asked by the CIA for advice on many occassions!!! I am not kididng. I read that in the inside flap of one of his books. Now that just cracks me up. :rofl:

[vincelee]

but seriously, anyone can "consult" the Pentagon and CIA. It's not like these two are known for their assessments anyway. Remember how there were quite a few mistakes in their annual assessment of Chinese Military Progress? Yeah. I can probably consult the Pentagon.

[SampanViking]

The best laugh I have had in years.

Also released under the title - "How to plan and fight a War thet best suits the capabilties and training of your enemy, without utilising any if your own Advantages". - snappy huh

The funniest part is that within months of its release Russia and China signed the Shanghia Co-operation Treaty. Says it all really does'nt it.

I keep my copy in the Bathroom, its strong, absorbant, and very useful in an emergency.

[Aerodriver]

Tom Clancy writes books to make money, it’s his job. The book is written for the American public first and any other country/person second, if at all. His books have to be pro American and show America winning other wise they would not sell in America and he would not be good at his job, which after all pays his bills.
If there was an author in another country and he wanted to make money the author would have the country that it is marketed in winning or he would not sell books- or he might have one best seller and thats it. Do you think Americas would buy a book that the main story line had them getting there ass kicked in a future war? Would a book that showed China getting its ass kicked (and I am not saying that is what would happen or not happen) in a future war be a best seller in China? Of course not.
Tom Clancy books = bed time reading, not a future military insight.

[vincelee]

but for us "ethusiasts", that material isn't even fit for bed time. Reading childish and sometimes completely stooooooopid lines just doesn't "get the juices flowing" like, say, a debat on WS-10A's implication towards Chinese military aviation.

[Gollevainen]

Well first of all, as an author or at least wannabeauthor of myself I have to raise hat to everyone who have publihsed something, inspite what BS the contest is...writing a book, even a lousy one is always ernoumous task...

but for us "ethusiasts", that material isn't even fit for bed time. Reading childish and sometimes completely stooooooopid lines just doesn't "get the juices flowing" like, say, a debat on WS-10A's implication towards Chinese military aviation.

but like it has been said, its entertaiment for dedicated audience, we 'enthuisthiastics' are always outcluded in these instances. Imagine yourself a book, focusing on getting the facts rigth...idea of entertaiment, nevertheless art isent to be always as accurate as possible.

[petty officer1]

I have finished 6 of his book, Hell.

In one of his book you can tell he really hate any one Asian.

In the book "without remorse". One russian and american officer in vietnam have reached in "conclution" that (I am quoting from the book) "They are just little evil yellow people, but there is a problem, there are so many of them."

That is from the book, you can check it by reading it.

I know he is just trying to sell some book, to feed his family. but that quote is just a little to much.

His best book i think is "the hunt for red october".

[adeptitus]

The sad truth is the books is based on china in1960s.


The book was originally published in 2000, and received very harsh reviews:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/B00007CWQI/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/104-8469571-6696748?%5Fencoding=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort%5Fby=-SubmissionDate&n=283155

Quote from one reviewer from Holland:
Please Donate to the "Give Clancy a holiday in China fund", December 16, 2004
Reviewer: Geert van Roosmalen "Geert" (The Netherlands) - See all my reviews
I've read a lot of Tom Clancy in my life but this is an absolute low.

You would think with all the millions he's made he could at least afford an $1000 plane ticket to China. Even if he had just gone for one weekend he would have seen that his portrayal of China is complete rubbish. Not only is it inaccurate it's downright terrible. The only Mao suits you will find in China these days are on Mao's corpse and in fancy dress stores.
Laughable was the seduction of the Chinese secretary, Having western food for the first time after all that "Chinese garbage". It makes me wonder how Clancy feels about this 5th column of slant-eyes (with U.S. nationality!) living in his own country peddling their 'garbage' to god-fearing honest wasps.

I'm from Holland and I cant wait to see how Tom Clancy would portray my country in his next novel. Probably we would be called cheeseheads or something suitably insulting every two sentences. We would obviously all live in windmills and walk around in clogs. In fact we wouldn't even be able to walk because we would be continuosly sticking our fingers in holes in dikes to stop our country flooding. We would invade some country that has been our ally for more than half a century (eg. UK) for some ridiculous reason (Dutch businessmen want to monopolize world cheese production). Finally our totally incompetent airforce/navy (whatever) would be destroyed by a single US plane: Final result: Cheeseheads, 100000 casualties. USA, 0 casualties. US (incompetent)allies, 200 casualties (to keep it realistic). Of course this would happen in a book of not less than 3000 pages and include JR telling us that he really really really dosn't like being POTUS every 2 or 3 pages.

Keep it up Clancy!! You're sliding, but rock bottom is still two or three books away.

[Ender Wiggin]

Wow, just wow I'm in awe of that review.

But seriously, the entire premace of the book is that Ming gets seduced and she willingly installs software in a computer that she has no idea what it does and this gives the CIA everything about what goes on in the Politburo, garbage, complete garbage I know its fiction but this isn't even remotely possible.

And why the heck was the PLAN in port this entire time? They should've noticed the aircarrier battle group approching their waters and should've had their fleet sortieing to see if they can do ANYTHING not waiting in port to die.

Those bombers obliterating the lead armoured elements wouldn't happen in reallife because in actuallity the PLAAF would've been active enough to either A) send modified ICBM's with conventional payload to obliterate the US airfields in Siberia and B) send in their own planes to destroy as many smart bombers as possible before they get even close enough to bomb the tanks.

Also as I said China had UAV's since 1994, they would've known that the US and Russians were making a stand at the gold mines and the US mech units wouldn't have been able to pierce their lines the PLA would've KNOWN.

And then Peng got shot, I liked Peng. And I knew he'ld get shot too, because of all of Clancy's damn foreshadowing. I think he deliberately named him Peng after a famous PLA general who was a brilliant general but fell in some political hard times, I think Clancy named this character Peng to make a mockery of the actual Peng.

[AssassinsMace]

Tom Clancy writes books to make money, it’s his job. The book is written for the American public first and any other country/person second, if at all. His books have to be pro American and show America winning other wise they would not sell in America and he would not be good at his job, which after all pays his bills.
If there was an author in another country and he wanted to make money the author would have the country that it is marketed in winning or he would not sell books- or he might have one best seller and thats it. Do you think Americas would buy a book that the main story line had them getting there ass kicked in a future war? Would a book that showed China getting its ass kicked (and I am not saying that is what would happen or not happen) in a future war be a best seller in China? Of course not.
Tom Clancy books = bed time reading, not a future military insight.

But it says something when those in the Pentagon and in Congress never began to seriously think of the scenario of China invading Siberia for its resources until Clancy's book was released. When The Hunt for Red October came out, Clancy himself talked about how people in Congress would ask him how did he get information on the caterpillar drive when no US agency had any intelligence on it. "No intelligence" is right! What does it say when those in the US Congress can't tell the difference between reality and fiction?

[Aerodriver]

I think that Tom Clancy has advised the pentagon and congress is given m uch more credit than reality. It says it inside his front cover because it will enable him to sell more books because people in america will think WOW, i must buy this book if he has advised the pentagon. It is his marketing team that get people to talk about his so called advice, and i am guessing the pentagon does not publish its best sources of intelligence.
Also if i was american I would not expect every person in congress to know about what its intelligence agencies know. You do not need to know about caterpillar tracks if you were voted into office because of (for example) your education reforms.
Now the matter of if people in US Congress can tell the difference between reality and fiction.........well thats a whole other topic ;-)

[swimmerXC]

Here ya go, wanna take anger on him?
http://www.clancyfaq.com/Hold%20Originals/feedback.htm
His non-fiction books about the US armed forces is correct...
I would say he should just stick to what he knows instead of complete BS ;)

[crazyinsane105]

Another thing I didn't like about that book was the fact that the Russian T-55's were slaughtering the Chinese T-80's. Now, back in 1994 I think China had a very good number of Type 96 tanks. Why weren't those tanks even mentioned in the book? On top of that, how can a 105 mm shell pierce through the armor of a T-80? Also, won't the T-80 have much more advanced fire control systems than the T-55?

There was another part of the book where it mentioned how a squadron of Apache helicopters destroyed an entire regiment of Chinese tanks. What I would like to know is how those choppers even got past the thick low level air defense system employed by the PLA. That book has so many holes in it that it isn't even funny. I haven't read his non-ficition books so I can't comment on those. Are they any good?

[Ender Wiggin]

Suposedly they used the UAV/GPS to find the AA guns, knocked it out with arties and then sent in the Apache's. Also, the T-98 was mentioned but it wasn't produced in enough numbers that had China invaded Russia wouldn't of had many of them.

[vincelee]

"For those who say my work is unrealistic, last week I read a news clipping that told the story of an unauthorized PRC pregnancy. The attempt at late abortion was made, but, remarkably, it failed, and the kid survived. So, what happened? Even worse than in B&D, the newborn was carried out to a rice paddy and drowned. I hope those bastards like it in hell. And today, the PRC is slamming catholics. Well, okay, guys, do your worst. The Roman Empire tried that, too. Guess who won?

Commie bastards are commie bastards, and I find it curious that the American media extends them such solicitude. Would the same be true of a reborn Hitler? I wonder. After all, Poland was never ours to lose, and the intelligentia of 1940 America simply refused to accept the information on what Hitler was doing to European Jews. Not that they were anti-semetic, of course. But now we've rebounded too far the other way. But that's just my opinion, and Matt Lauer points out that I am too conservative. It's my education (catholic, including eight years of Jesuits) that tells me that principles are things we apply evenhandedly to everybody, lest they be mistaken for mere ideology or expediency. I suppose that's a conservative value, too. Pity. Principles are not supposed to be overly political, are they? "

This is what he said on his board. I wonder if the guy is still sane.

[Soyuz]

Well I haven't read the Bear and the Dragon but I have read (It was so bad i couldn't finish it!) another one of his earlier books SSN, The story line in that was a power struggle within the CCP results in hardliners taking over and Li Peng becomes president. He then orders an invaision of the Spratly Islands and for some reason the US even though they haven't tried to claim the islands, decide to declare war on the PRC.

The book follows the captain of an american Los Angeles class SSN which seems single handedly to destroy the whole of the PLAN which in the book has recieved significant help fron the Russians in the form of Alfa and Akula subs however this all seems to be a bit far fetched to me!

Yes I also read somewhere that he has worked with the CIA, I wonder did they consult with Clancy about the military capabilites of Saddams military before the 2nd Gulf war:D

[crazyinsane105]

Yeah, SSN was such a horrible book. Aparently ONE US nuke sub wipes out much of the PLAN!!! :rofl:

[darth sidious]

Well I haven't read the Bear and the Dragon but I have read (It was so bad i couldn't finish it!) another one of his earlier books SSN, The story line in that was a power struggle within the CCP results in hardliners taking over and Li Peng becomes president. He then orders an invaision of the Spratly Islands and for some reason the US even though they haven't tried to claim the islands, decide to declare war on the PRC.
The book follows the captain of an american Los Angeles class SSN which seems single handedly to destroy the whole of the PLAN which in the book has recieved significant help fron the Russians in the form of Alfa and Akula subs however this all seems to be a bit far fetched to me!
Yes I also read somewhere that he has worked with the CIA, I wonder did they consult with Clancy about the military capabilites of Saddams military before the 2nd Gulf war:D

a single S-class subwill be more then enough to destory the poor LA
akula= inprove S-class built with steel to reduce cost

also at the time the US have no weapon capable of catching the ALFA

that book is truely pathetic ,the only reason clancy does it is for money
his ear;ierbooks are somewhat OK

[Finn McCool]

I'm reading this book now, and basically this is why it sucks so bad

1. The President, CIA officers and state department officals don't swear every other word.

2. It has no connection to reality whatsover.

3. Tom Clancy is a dirty old man. (If you've read the book you know what I'm talking about. :spam:)

4. Tom Clancy uses it to show what damned dirty commie baby-killing freedom hating evil bastards they all are (being sarcastic). The whole book shows what a racist bigot Tom Clancy is. ( He repeatedly calls the Chinese barbarians and heathens:rofl: HEathens! I didn't even know anyone had said that word since 1652:rofl: )

[FriedRiceNSpice]

C) The USAF knocked out 6 bridges in the Harbin Wei railroad network to decapitate the PLA's supplylines in Russia, believeable if it weren't for the fact that the PLA's AA and FLAK defences should've been more then enough to knock the fighter bombers, China's radar systems are not Iraq's.


This was done with F-117s, if you remember. F-117s were featured prominently in the book. For some reason, neither the F-22 nor F-35 was even given mention.

Another unbelievable part is how the Russians were able to defeat superior numbers of Chinese tanks. Oh, and I love the part where 4 F-16s destroy EXACTLY 786 Chinese tanks.

My favorite part of the book is when the American guy told the Chinese guy his penis was larger. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Then the Chinese leader told his diplomat to say some very offensive thing to the American guy. It was hilarious. :rofl: :rofl:

[Roger604]

This was done with F-117s, if you remember. F-117s were featured prominently in the book. For some reason, neither the F-22 nor F-35 was even given mention.

Another unbelievable part is how the Russians were able to defeat superior numbers of Chinese tanks. Oh, and I love the part where 4 F-16s destroy EXACTLY 786 Chinese tanks.

My favorite part of the book is when the American guy told the Chinese guy his penis was larger.

Then the Chinese leader told his diplomat to say some very offensive thing to the American guy. It was hilarious.

:roll: :roll:

Tom Clancy is just a masturbatory fantasy for jingoistic racists.

"Oh those inscrutable slanty-eyed gooks" :mad: :mad:

[Player 0]

This book is as about as realistic as a website i once read claiming, that based on the shape of their geography, Russia was a demonic bear, with Belarus as its horn, and that China was a satanic dragon, spewing the fiery apocalypse of SARS from its mouth of Hong Kong.

It doesn't really have anything to do with this book, but i thought i'd mention it to add entertainment value to an already entertaining thread.

Seriously i've met people like Clancy, and believe me these people are ignorant, paranoid, racist and quick to anger, i'd actually like to invite mr. Clancy onto this forum, let's see how far his 'knowledge' of military affairs get him here:nana:

People like this should be ignored, they're both moronic and igsinificant, there are many peopel like Clancy, but Clancy was simply lucky enough to get a break in his career, if someone like him can become so rich and famous, it says a lot of sad things about the US, best to ignore these people, sure you can humiliate them on the internet, but short of that there's no way to really get them to change their minds, they are best ignored, less their stupidity actually infect us like the disease they so are.

:china:

[Gollevainen]

Ok, now that you have poured your cup of anger upon poor Mr. Clancy once again, I would like to remind that lets keep things civil and avoid letting this get out of hands and turning to a flaming countrybashing event...

[Kampfwagen]

The only Tom Clancy book I have ever really read was Rainbow Six. Back then I was pretty young then too. It was a good book for the most part except for some glaring mistakes. (A member of a hostage rescue team using an M60E3???)

As far as Clancy himself? About the only thing here other than what I read here was about how he should have served in vietnam but did not. (Then the author, for all seriousness, goes on to say how if he had the money Clancy did, then he would become a West African Despot.)

Personaly, I dont care about the authors of works (Music, Video Games, Novels, etc.) as long as they make good works.

[The_Zergling]

Personaly, I dont care about the authors of works (Music, Video Games, Novels, etc.) as long as they make good works.

Similiar opinion here, however I'd think what tends to arouse anger and exasperation is that most of his scenarios are supposed to be based in modern time and supposedly plausible, which make it just a sophisticated method of military wanking.

You can get away with some total BS in novels that don't have any technological or historical parallel to the real world, but that's about as far as you can get before getting your ass handed to you for completely distorting real facts.

[netspider]

I was intending to get this book before I saw you guys posts. I will just then find a better place to spend my 7 bucks. I have been sort of a fan of Tom Clancy after I read some of his non-fictional books, such as his submarine book and F-22 book. Those books I think are of good quality and accurate to some extent. In particular, his submarine book has an interesting section discussng how the life is on boat, which I think is interesting. The only non-fictional book of his I ever read is "Read Storm Rising", which I think is pretty good, and I like his way of telling stories in that book, plain language, no emotional bushit, not much drama. That way he kinds of build his reputation to me.

Now since I found out he is a racist towards general asian people, there is no way I am buying his book.

Having said good bye to Tom Clancy, are there other authors in military-related topics worth reading? I do need some books to kill time on planes, please no romance novels.

[Ender Wiggin]

i was going to suggest Harry Turtledove books but they have slightly more detailed sex scenes and I geuss that counts as romance ;)

HT writes alternative history essentially "what if" kinda thing, his most famous ones is a series based on whether orders Lee's Battle orders 122 didnt fall into Union Hands allowing Lee to win key battles. Brittain and France at this point recognized Confederate independance and forced the US to recognize it as well. The book series continues onto WWI, the interwar years and now WWII.

He also has a few other books series, I liked "Days of Infamy" which is a realistic scenario where Japan actually seizes the Hawaiian islands with troops not just raiding it, a sequal is out now I think for it. Lots of cool fighter scenes.

Another book is his "World War" series which is partly scifi, where in 1942 4 foot tall eguana aliens from Tau Ceti system invade earth forcing German, Japan, USSR, USA, and GB to work together to stop them. Has a "Colonization" series as a sequal which covers the 60's and now has another sequal that covers 2004.

Though the Book Samurai! by Saburo Sakai is also good, its partly his memoirs partly an "historical novel" its about his experiances as a Japanese fighter pilot in WWII set as a novel rather then a journal. LOTS of cool fighter combat.

But ya, I'm pretty sure Clancy's only good books were Red Storm Rising and Hunt for the Red October.

[Gollevainen]

well philip K dick wrote a book about 'what if' history, about nazis winning the WWII, but i cannot recall its english name....

But if you like this sort of 'thriller' type of books, I would suggest Frederick Forsyth's books. His the top notch of these 'genre' and Maybe he has a 'western' views like clancy, but he knows how to write them

...David Mansons Shadow Over Babylon was also good one...

BUT if you want to read something better, try Robert Holdstocks, Robin Hobbs or Stephen R. Donaldson's fantasy (as i expect that ALL of you have allready read all of Tolkiens work...) Or some good Soviet scifi...

[Ender Wiggin]

the Soviets had scifi?

[Finn McCool]

Portrait of Dorian Grey was a good book, and the Ender's Game series are probably my favorite books, especially Ender's Game itself, and so is anything by Edgar Allen Poe or Ray Bradbury, but those aren't military(except ender's game) .

If you wanna read good military books I would reccomend non-fiction. The Boxer Rebellion was a good book, but I forget who it was by. D-Day by Stephen Ambrose was good, liked that. In Flanders Fields sucked. Queen Victoria's Little Wars was a good one. Also the What If Series is good, sort of like Turtledove but not as long. They are a collection of essays by major historians on things like "what if the nazis had repulsed D-Day." (It would have sucked for them because Berlin would have gotten nuked and the Soviets would have ruled their entire country and all of western Europe right up to the present day.)

Ender, are Turtledove's books any good? I was gonna read the one with the aliens.

[Player 0]

I'd personally reccommend anything by H P Lovecraft, especially Call of Cthulhu, but it's all really sci-fi/fantasy/horror, primarily horror, also Shadows over Innsmouth and Mountains of Madness are very good too.

[Ender Wiggin]

read, like, Harry Turtledove is one of those writers that perplex me.

like the actual "writing" eg: dialogue arent very good, however the "story" plot, story development, fight scenes etc are good.

Essentially the books are the thought provoking/interesting kind of books.

Like the WW series could've been 2 maybe three books, not 4. Any book with more then one book always seems to spend the first chapter repeating everything and then gets onto the good stuff, theyre addictive even if they're not literary works of art. :/

[Kampfwagen]

Stephen King's earlier works were really fantastic. I liked IT, but I did not get very far in it. (I had to return it to the library!) I also read 'Who Goes There', which was a short story that became the bassis of the 1982 movie The Thing. The only other military-ish novel was a book by Robert Ludlum, the guy who made The Bourne series. I think it was called "The Prometheus Factor" or something to that effect. It was very confusing, and this sense of confusion is even sort of parodied when the main charicter towards the end of book falls to his knees and grips his head from it all.

[Gollevainen]

Soviets had the one of the most magnificent scifi literature...Ever heard of Argadi and Boris Stugarski?? not to mention, all the 'real' russian and soviet literature...

[cesachs]

I advice you all the reading of The Third World War. August 1985 edited by Sir John Hacket (he commanded airborne units during WW2 including a brigade at Arnhem and became after the war, among other commands, CinC of the British Army of the Rhine).

The book has been written in 1978 and is about a real war fought all over the world in 1985. It is not written as a novel but as a book written in 1986 trying to explain why NATO and Britain won the war.

What is really fascinating is the description of the causes and aftermath of the conflict. It is not Red Storm Rising or The Bear and the Dragoon! Fascinating too is to see what the authors had right or wrong. For instance, Iran plays a important role against USSR. But after the Islamic Revolution...

I only see two major bad points. First, the account of naval war is not up to what it should. Then, the authors imagine that a socialist President in France is elected in 1981 with a Radical/Socialist/Communist coalition. That's what happened. The Soviets then thought it was possible to wage war on NATO without a french reaction. That's stupid. Nobody but ignorant and french conservatives could have done such a mistake (I met quite a lot of russian diplomats and politicians. They really knew and know what the West is about).

Anyway, a great book still smelling a world that is no more.

[adeptitus]

Tom Clancy's best work dates back to Hunt for the Red October. The latter books slowly degraded. Of all the authors who dabble in modern-day politics in their fictions, I like Jerry Pournelle the best.

For alternate history, my favorite author is S.M. Stirling's Domination of Draka series. I'm a big fan of genetic science.

For sci-fi, my favorite author is Robert Asprin's earlier (pre-Peter J. Heck) Phule's Company series, in addition to Tambu and The Bug Wars. Though technically, they aren't hardcore sci-fi, and are more human/alien relations. For hardcore sci-fi, there's always William Gibson's Sprawl Trilogy.

[DarkEminence]

Well, since the forum is moving toward other books...

Have any of you heard of the Dragon's Fury series? Allegedly, it was written by Jeff Head (if there is no relation between the author and the Forum member, my apologies). It has a tad bit of a conservative/one sided bent against Chinese, at least, from the excerpts I have read. Of course, if any of you have any opinions against this, feel free to respond.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon%27s_fury

[Gollevainen]

Allegedly, it was written by Jeff Head (if there is no relation between the author and the Forum member, my apologies).

...Jeffy is gonna eat you alive:D :D

[PiSigma]

oooo, you are so screwed now.. jk.. it is written by our very own Jeff Head. so if you want to discuss the book, just pm him, and BUY a copy. i'm sure he'll appreciated it.

[DarkEminence]

Now that I've got all your attention...:rofl:

Well, I've always been a fan of technothrillers. I should read this one out...

PS: No offence meant...

[adeptitus]

I think Jeff still has his book avail via free download (.pdf) from his web site (jeffhead.com?), but I'm sure he'd be happy if ya'll went and bought a copy off amazon.com. :D

IMO Dragon's Fury is far better than Bear and the Dragon. In Bear and the Dragon the Chinese had no contingency plan whatsoever for foreign involvement, which is completely unrealistic. In Dragon's Fury at least Jeff explore the possibility of terriorism as a tool to damage US economic and industrial capability.

Personally I think western authors tend to write Chinese expansionism based on their own "western" perception of expansionist powers, specifically a megalomanic drive to crush and conquer as much as possible -- Alexander, Napoleon, Hitler, various Roman emperors, etc. You could also say that the Japanese in WW2 was influenced by this type of western thought.

However I think very few of them explore the possibility that Eastern (and sone western) conquerers are content with grabbing what they want, then build a wall and sit on it instead of going further, after a "cost-benefit" analysis. Examples include Hadrian's Wall, and even the Soviet Union. Had the Soviets been hell-bent on miltiary conquest of the world, they wouldn't have lasted 70 years. Imagine if Hitler had been content with his earlier conquest and not declared war on US or Russia.

This is one reason why I like SM Stirling's Draka-series. Instead of the typical foam-at-the-mount, drug-crazed and wild-eyed villian hellbent on global conquest in 3 years, the Domination of the Draka is far more intelligent and willing to sit and consoldiate their conquest, then slowly creep forward to grab more territory. From the time when th Draka developed their world domination ideology, to the time of total global conquest, roughly took a century to complete.

I have yet to see fictions where the PRC becomes economically and politically powerful in the 21st century, extend its influence over Asia, then engage in a cold-war style power struggle vs. the US over a span of 50-100 years, or even a 3-way power struggle in 2100 between Chinese & Indian dominated Asia, vs. Muslinm-dominated Middle East-Europe-Africa, vs. the American Empire. Typical American fiction leans toward crazed oriental vs. white american male savior of the world with very short timelines, which is getting really old.

[oringo]

However I think very few of them explore the possibility that Eastern (and sone western) conquerers are content with grabbing what they want, then build a wall and sit on it instead of going further, after a "cost-benefit" analysis. Examples include Hadrian's Wall, and even the Soviet Union. Had the Soviets been hell-bent on miltiary conquest of the world, they wouldn't have lasted 70 years. Imagine if Hitler had been content with his earlier conquest and not declared war on US or Russia.
A little correction. Hitler didn't declare war on US. US declared war on Germany after some U-boats sunk a few American convoy ships to UK. Hitler didn't declare war on USSR either; he just directly started attacking Russia. IMHO even if he didn't invade USSR, Stalin would've probably opened war with Germany eventually. The secret treaty between Germany and USSR were only temporary, and they both knew it.

[adeptitus]

A little correction. Hitler didn't declare war on US. US declared war on Germany after some U-boats sunk a few American convoy ships to UK. Hitler didn't declare war on USSR either; he just directly started attacking Russia. IMHO even if he didn't invade USSR, Stalin would've probably opened war with Germany eventually. The secret treaty between Germany and USSR were only temporary, and they both knew it.

I was taught that Nazi Germany had a policy of appeasement toward the US to prevent US from entering the war, then Hitler decided to declare war agains the US 4 days after the bombing of Pearl Harbor?

I think, if we were explore an "alternate history" fiction where Hitler was more reasonable and listened to J. Goebbels and R. Hess instead of H. Goring, things would've turned out very differently. Also, in the event that Germany was able to make a cease fire agreement with UK, and the Soviets decided to attack, I think Nazi Germany on the defensive with full force would've infliced severe punishment on the Soviets on a far bigger scale than the Russo-Finnish Winter War.

[oringo]

I was taught that Nazi Germany had a policy of appeasement toward the US to prevent US from entering the war, then Hitler decided to declare war agains the US 4 days after the bombing of Pearl Harbor?

I think, if we were explore an "alternate history" fiction where Hitler was more reasonable and listened to J. Goebbels and R. Hess instead of H. Goring, things would've turned out very differently. Also, in the event that Germany was able to make a cease fire agreement with UK, and the Soviets decided to attack, I think Nazi Germany on the defensive with full force would've infliced severe punishment on the Soviets on a far bigger scale than the Russo-Finnish Winter War.
You are right. I was thinking WWI. However, I think that if USSR had attacked Germany first, things would've been different. The reason why Germany was able to inflict so much damange on USSR at the beginning of the war was because they took the Russians by supprise. The Russians knew that the Germans were getting ready for an invasion, but they thought the Germans would at least get some winter gears first. While the Russians were slowly mobilizing their troops, the Germans suddenly attacked USSR without equipping their troops with winter gears, hoping that they would finish the major battles before winter arrives. A famous story was that USSR intel was monitoring the price of lamb to determine when the Germans would attack (Germans would have needed to kill lots of sheep to make winter gears for their troops, and coincidentally the lamb price would fall).