4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The VA exists to limit the government's liability, July 21, 2007
This review is from: The Wages of War: When America's Soldiers Came Home : From Valley Forge to Vietnam (Hardcover)
The title above is a quote/paraphrase from the book that has long stuck out in my mind. I read this book back in the '90s, and often find myself referring back to it. The authors make it clear in many cases where their sympathies lie and there is a pervasive politically leftist bias that runs throughout the book. That doesn't mean that myself or others would necessarily and automatically disagree with some of their digs and personal assertions. It is by no means a dry, boring text book on history, but the reader needs to be aware of the often not very subdued opinions the authors express. There seems to be a reasonable trade off there somehow between subjectivity and objectivity.
Though I'm not really sure why it was included, the authors did write quite a bit about the so-called 'Shays Rebellion'-I suppose to give an indication of how Revolutionary War veterans were treated by the financiers in Boston and how these veterans and their plight was ignored or actually misunderstood by the rest of the new United States. That was an interesting account of a portion of American History we rarely read or hear about, and the authors clearly refuse to buy into the standard interpretation of the so-called Shays Rebels as being mere troublemakers bent on challenging Federal or even state authority. If convincing citizens to agree with them on this view was their intent, they certainly won at least one convert.
The authors move steadily from the Revolutionary War on and show the evolution of U.S. veterans' medical care, pensions and benefits...or lack thereof. A huge portion of the book was spent on the Agent Orange issue, as well as the radiation exposure from 1950s atomic bomb tactical maneuvers. Another section that stood out for me was the hundreds of Spanish-American War veterans suffering from fever and virtually dumped into a makeshift field hospital on Long Island. Also, the authors spent a portion of the book pointing out atrocities and excesses committed by American soldiers against the rebels in the Philippines. It's not always clear why the authors included some of the information they did but these things were interesting nonetheless.
The authors spent a reasonable amount of time on the Bonus Marchers (B.E.F) and how they were eventually run out of their Hooverville in D.C. . Certainly no book claiming to be about American war veterans would dare ignore this chapter and the authors did not disappoint here. The authors couldn't conceal their disdain for General MacArthur. MacArthur (along with Patton and Eisenhower who were also involved in the 'attack' against the B.E.F.) did indeed become famous in the next war...and the next-while the Bonus March veterans became a footnote. I must admit that though I believe MacArthur to be an important and brilliant American general I still have always sympathized with the Bonus Marchers. An exact quote at the end of the "After the First World War" chapter shows what I mean by inherent bias on the part of the authors:
"Within a few years, America would have a new war to fight-the most monstrous war in all history. MacArthur, of course, would be a hero again. As the United States drifted closer to that war, the veterans of the Great war-expelled from Washington by the very Government they had fought for-were not only forgiven. They were forgotten."
I don't believe there is a section on the Merchant Mariners and their struggle for veteran's recognition seeing as how they were in constant peril of attack during the world wars. Perhaps a little less space should have been spent on the Agent Orange/PCB/Dioxin angle. However, at least one author seems to have a great deal of knowledge in this area as a journalist covering this topic. The other author also apparently represented Vietnam veterans concerning their claims. Had this book been written later I'm sure a lengthy treatment of the 'Gulf War Syndrome' would have been included. Considering how a ridiculously large number (something like 30,000 or more!) of our Gulf War veterans have succumbed to this it is amazing that we don't hear more about it from the media. Of course, we don't hear much about Agent Orange or radiation poisoning either.
Even though the book meandered at times and lost sight at times of the relationship between war veteran and Washington it was still hard to put down. They did manage to cover quite a bit of U.S. military minutiae that you are not likely to find in a single volume. For the most part they did an excellent job reporting on the treatment of our soldiers as they returned home from war over the last two centuries. There is obviously what I would call a Liberal tone or bias throughout the book. However, this bias did not diminish the factual information they presented nor the fact that these issues concerning our military are issues that exist no matter what the political bent of the author or reader is. A more scholarly work would have let the great amount of researched information speak for itself. This book is more editorial than textbook.
The reader also has to endure a questioning of the morality of American wars (Henry David Thoreau got dragged into the section on the War with Mexico). For some reason the interesting though rather trivial story of the San Patricios as well as the general outlook of Americans regarding Roman Catholics at that time was included-and I don't understand why unless included in a book specifically about the Mexican War or a book on 1840s America. Clearly the authors' points at times don't seem clear or always stick with or connect with the reader.
I feel that a different title for this book would have been more on the mark as it clearly isn't just about veterans' affairs over time. Actually, it's more like three books in one: veterans affairs history, the cost of warfare to individual Americans, and the examination of America's military conflicts from a nontraditional perspective.
So, besides what I perceive as the presence of quite a bit of political bias and am not entirely sure why some things were included in the book and some things weren't, it is still an excellent book and should be read by those interested in U.S. military, political and social history.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
