Customer Reviews

So Far from God: The U.S. War With Mexico, 1846-1848

5 star:		(20)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The war with Mexico has been given little attention by historians possibly because the victory has become tainted with the passage of time. In the succeeding century, the war assumed the mantle of a calculated move by an emerging power to steal land from a weaker and defenseless neighbor. In reality, the issues involved in this war were far more complex yet historians disconcerted by the easy victory have declined to fully examine the background leading to the conflict.

In the 1840s, Mexico was nation of contrasts; remnants of Spanish imperialism juxtaposed against the backwardness of a native population. The Mexican officers' corps was a highly educated and strong force in Mexican politics. They were supremely confident of the outcome in any conflict with the United States. Unfortunately, they commanded untrained albeit brave troops. This attitude of elitism by the Mexican Army officers ultimately proved disastrous in the war with the United States.

The Mexican government resisted all blandishments for a peaceful solution as they considered the United States a second-rate power with little enthusiasm for war. Their mistrust of American motives began with the Texas question and was heightened because of the recent intervention by American officials in the internal affairs of California. Mexicans entered the war with confidence and with the feeling that right was on their side.

The war resulted in thousands of deaths from shot and shell, disease, and neglect. Mexico sank into the turmoil and distrust bequeathed to a defeated nation. They were racked by recriminations and political divisions that have impaired a just relationship with the United States to this day. The United States became a two ocean power; the dominant country on the continent of the Americas, and an agressive nation that began to enforce its sovreignty against Great Britain, France, Russian, and any other interloper in the western hemisphere.

The author's analysis refutes any question of a peaceful settlement. Mexico was too proud and the United States wanted too much. The issues were fairly clear cut and concerned the continued expansion of the United States through sparsely populated areas ostensibly under Mexican control. There had been prior discussions with Mexico over land acquisitions. Money was offered along with mild threats - both coupled with promises not to interfere further into Mexican affairs. Mexican pride proved unyielding. With their defeat, Mexico paid the ultimate price assessed by a victor nation against a loser; loss of territory and the breakup of a national identity.

The war provided a rich cast of characters that dominated the American political scene for decades. The conflict proved a training ground for the Civil War and many future army generals from the Union and Confederate sides bloodied themselves against the Mexicans. The war with Mexico obliquely led to the Civil War and provided a bevy of "heroes" from which future American presidents were chosen.

The is a very good book. While offering little that is new, it does bring forth the facts in a very readable manner and stresses the schisms that still divide the peoples of both countries.

As with all the other books by Mr Eisenhower that I have read, this one is very well done. His telling of this conflict, with the dozens of characters on both sides, the vicious bloody battles, the harrowing marches across a brutal landscape round out the story of this little known war. The text has several superb maps that allow the reader to follow the combatants. His information on the St Patrick's Battalion (Irishmen who deserted the US Army before and during the war) is detailed and interesting. Santa Ana is shown as an egotistical commander who had little regard for the welfare of his men, Taylor and Scott are portrayed as men with faults and certain military skills. Overall, an interesting read, it won't disapoint those with a thirst for this conflict.

If anyone undertakes even a cursory study of the concept of Manifest Destiny, he or she will sooner or later be forced to deal with the facts surrounding the US war with Mexico.

The contemporary evaluation is that we were wrong and used pretense to steal one third of Mexico. The fact that we offered to buy the land which was ultimately acquired by arms, and for which we subsequently paid, does not auger well in our defense. But to use today's standards to judge the right or wrong of an event that occurred over 150 years ago, like many historians do today, never produces good history. Simply stated, Mexico's disorganized centrist policies left it unable to govern itself. If the United States had not taken Mexico to task, another nation would have. Mexico was incredibly unstable and corrupt. It was both socially and morally bankrupt, a fact often overlooked today.

John D. Eisenhower leaves the correctness or incorrectness of this war where it belongs, with the reader. He tries to avoid the mistake of judging 19th century events with 21st century standards. Except for his short introduction, he makes no political statements. He neither supports this war as a natural extension of Manifest Destiny nor condemns it as some form of land based buccaneering. He simply reports the facts as they occurred.

And report the facts he does! What the American military accomplished over such a vast theater of operations with little more than 100,000 men in less than one year of active campaigning is almost incomprehensible. Mexico was no easy conquest. This became the bloodiest war the United States ever fought: 13% of those engaged died. But it was also a string of the most amazing, lightening fast victories, fought by officers who would face each as protagonists in the subsequent American Civil War. In a very real sense, this war with Mexico was a training ground for the holocaust that was to follow 13 years later.

This is a study in operational efficiency. American armies executed their war plans with impunity in four separate theaters of war and over thousands and thousands of miles. Fought from today's Brownsville, Texas to Monterrey and Buena Vista, from Veracruz to Mexico City, from Missouri to Chihuahua, and from El Paso to Los Angeles and San Francisco, this war spanned the continent. Fought at a time when communication really did not exist, when wagon trains and pack mules were the only forms of logistical support, this kind of coordinated effort was truly a spectacular feat of arms.

A model for this book might have been Donald R. Hickey's "The War of 1812: A Short History." In "The War of 1812," Hickey summarizes both the political and military battles of the War of 1812 concisely and elegantly, leaving the reader with a clear view of the issues. Eisenhower's book fails in this regard.

Neither an in-depth look at the battles, nor a political history of the war, the book is an uncomfortable blend that never quite makes it on any level. There are some surprising omissions here (Where exactly were the borders of Texas at the beginning of the war? Why did Polk allow Santa Anna back into Mexico?), and "continuity" often seems amiss. Detailed descriptions end suddenly and awkward three sentence paragraphs appear, as if the editors were uncertain how to proceed. The book is "half a loaf" and readers interested in specific topics (the politics, cultural impacts or the battles) would be better off looking elswhere.

This is simply the best short history of the Mexican-American War that I have read [and I have read several]. It is so well written. I did not expect to like this book as much as I did, and, since reading it, have passed it around to my state and National Guard pals. Each one of them has come back to me glowing about how good this book is. If you only have time for one history of this war this is th book.

Eisenhower's writing is elegant. He paints wonderful pictures of the military leaders who showed their skills, or didn't, and who eventually became key figures in the American Civil War. Winfield Scott comes to life and one LT Robert E Lee. I began my study of the Napolean of the West, Santa Anna because of this book. It is a keeper on my bookshelf.

This well-written account of the Mexican-American conflict is a fascinating story of the war with Mexico. It covers the political as well as military aspects from the Mexican advance into Texas to the eventual purchase of California and New Mexico. The military dominance of Mexico's world-class calvary and armed forces contrasts vividly with the greedy and egotistical leadership of Santa Anna.

This book did much to dispel the myths and impressions I remember from grade school history. Texans and Californians will find this work extremely interesting. I was left wanting to know more about Santa Anna. I picked up a couple of books on his life that are bizarre to say the least. The only known leader of a country that led a revolt and overthrew himself! You can't make this stuff up. Don't miss out on this account!

I like it that nowhere in this book is it mentioned that the author is the son of President Eisenhower. The book is presented on its own merits -- and it's a good book, the best I have found about our fascinating and momentous war with Mexico in 1846-1847. Eisenhower lacks flash and dash as an author. The virtues of the book are reliability, thoroughness, lack of obvious bias, good maps, and illustrations.

Mexico could have won this war. They outnumbered the Americans two in one in nearly every battle. American artillery and aggressiveness combined with abysmal Mexican leadership won the war. President Polk impresses as a man I wouldn't want to play poker with. Zachary Taylor-- a future President -- was a good, no-nonsense general. Winfield Scott was something of a military genius. His expedition from Veracuz on the coast to capture Mexico City (remember the line? "in the halls of Montezuma.") duplicated the feat of Cortes three centuries earlier. In covering the whole war in one volume, Eisenhower misses some of the drama of this bold and brilliant expedition. Among the Mexicans, alas, are no admirable characters -- except for the long-suffering, misled common soldiers who fought bravely. Santa Anna dominates and he was a charlatan.

One of the most interesting features of the Mexican war is the participation as junior officers of soldiers who would become famous in the Civil war. Captain Robert E. Lee was a hero in this war as an engineer and scout. Grant, Meade, McClellan, Stonewall Jackson, Beauregard and a host of others appear in cameo roles.

The timeless lament of the Mexicans is "Poor Mexico: so far from God and so close to the United States." But then again, Mexico is the "colossus of the north" when you look at it from the point of view of the countries in Central America.

Gen. John S.D. Eisenhower doesn't say anything new and borrows heavily from sources available when the book was written, so some of the same mistakes are repeated. There are also some major ommissions.

With this understood, Eisenhower has made a readable summary of the entire war for the general public. If you are new to the subject, this would be a good book for you to start. Once this book is read, however, you should go to other places for a more indepth and accurate telling of specific facets and events.

This book proves to be well written, well researched and quite readable even to a casual reader. The author present his material with certain level of clarity and insights that make this book a sure fire winner.

Luckily, the author does not malingered over the political correctness of the war as we see it today. The Mexican War cost Mexico any chance she had in becoming a dominate power in North America. That role went to the United States for better or for worst. As an American, I would say, for the better!!

The author also wrote with amazing sense of objectively regarding many of the major characters of the war, from Winfield Scott to Santa Anna.

If there was one book to read on the subject, I would recommended this one.

So Far from God, by John S. D. Eisenhower (brigadier general in the Army Reserve, ambassador to Belgium, and president's son) is a military history of the Mexican War of 1846-48. The title is taken from the quote from Mexican General Porfirio Diaz: "Poor Mexico! So far from God and so close to the United States".

I read this book as a counter-point to A Country of Vast Designs by Robert W. Merry, which I have also reviewed on Amazon.com. While Merry's book is historically factual and very well written, it did leave me with the feeling that he was less than objective in his favorable treatment of President Polk. Eisenhower's book is a good counter-point in that it is also historically factual, provides far more detail on military tactics, and is not biased in favor of Polk. If Eisenhower displays any bias, it is toward the field commanders, Generals Winfield Scott and Zachary Taylor, in their dealings with Polk. I can't find much to criticize about Taylor's dealings with the president, but I believe there was plenty of fault to be shared between Scott and Polk. Scott was a superb field commander who planned and executed the amphibious landing of his army at Veracruz, capture of that city, overland march, capture of Mexico City, and occupation of that city almost flawlessly. He was cited by no less authority than the Duke of Wellington as the "greatest living soldier". However, Scott was also egotistical, insubordinate to both the President and the Secretary of War, and fully deserving of his troops' nickname, "Old Fuss and Feathers."

My only criticism of Eisenhower's book is that it needs a better editor. Senator Lewis Cass is cited as the senator from Ohio; he represented Michigan. Polk's emissary to John C. Fremont (who commanded a US Army expedition in California) was US Marine Lieutenant Archibald H. Gillespie; Eisenhower renames him "Arnold H. Gillespie". These are perhaps trivial errors, but they leave me wondering what other errors I might have missed.

If you are looking for a detailed description of the US military campaign in the Mexican War, read Eisenhower's book. On the other hand, if you want the war put into a larger picture which involves US politics, the concurrent US-British dispute over the Oregon Country (which almost led to war), and British involvement in the Republic of Texas preceding the Mexican War, read Merry's book.