Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
The Best Enemy Money Can Buy Hardcover – November 3, 2014
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
This book is the standard book about the massive support from the United States to then Soviet Union, during the Cold War and even before.
This book has these main great parts:
1- "The deaf mute blindmen — to quote from Lenin — are those multinational businessmen who see no further than the bottom line of the current contract. Unfortunately, these internationalist operators have disproportionate influence in Washington."
2- "In brief, the Ford-Gorki plant has a continuous history of production of armored cars and wheeled vehicles for Soviet army use: those used against the United States in Korea and Vietnam."
3- "No country large or small will make any progress in the late 20th century without an ability to manufacture integrated circuits and associated devices. These are the core of the new industrial revolution, both civilian and military, and essentially the same device is used for both military and civilian end uses. A silicon chip is a silicon chip, except that military quality requirements may be more strict than civilian ones."
4- "In 1964 the Soviet Union had a stock of 919,000 automobiles, all produced in Western-built plants, only slightly more than Argentina (800,000) and far less than Japan (1.6 million) and the United States (71.9 million)."
5- "Angola, a one time Portuguese colony, was "liberated" ten years ago by the MPLA (Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola), a Marxist organization in alliance with Angolian nationalist groups. The MPLA was not elected and has never held elections. MPLA seized power and has been kept in power by 36,000 Cubans and about 1,200 Soviet military personnel. The Cubans and the Soviets are in Angola for the same reason Angolan Marxists will not allow free elections: because Marxism does not represent the people of Angola."
Well, if we were in 1987, probably I would be giving five stars for this book, but we are decades later.
Between 1989 and 1991, the Soviet Union fell, rotten to the core, but not before the extermination of more than 60,000,00 Christians there.
Criminal behavior of big American companies to Soviet Union was replaced with the same criminal behavior to Russia, China and Islamic World.
Antony Cyril Sutton ( 1925 – 2002) isn't alive today, but if would be, he could see that we have, in our times, the best Jihad money can buy.
Interesting and stinging discussion of the extent to which Soviet industrialization, and especially Soviet military industry and technological development, was dependent upon foreign (especially US, British, and German) technology transfer. If that were all that the author (Anthony Sutton) did, this would be 4 – star book. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case. The approach in the book is very much a polemic against US government policy (both Republican and Democratic) and US corporations which sold equipment to the former USSR. There are numerous factual errors and distortions in this book. In addition, the author tries to set himself up as an expert on US and NATO trade and strategic technology transfer policy and legislation and also as an expert on US Constitutional law. He appoints himself as prosecutor, judge, and jury in determining that the US State Department and Commerce Department are run by traitors; in his concluding chapter, he flat out accuses State and Commerce Department personnel over the decades of being guilty of treason.
To cite one subject: Chapter 8 discusses “The Soviets at Sea.” On page 121, he claims that the Soviet post WW II “W” (“Whiskey” in NATO) class submarine is a direct copy of the German WW II Type XXI submarine. A review of several references on the Soviet Navy shows that this is simply untrue: the “W” class is about 2/3 the displacement and has about half the engine horsepower of the Type XXI. He also spends several pages agonizing over the fact that ALL Soviet marine diesel technology is based on two or three major western manufacturers: Burmeister & Wain, Sulzer, and M.A.N. This should hardly be a surprise: the majority of marine diesel engines in the entire world are based on these three companies, either purchased directly from them or manufactured under license obtained from them. For example, marine diesel engine manufacturers in China, South Korea, Taiwan, and japan have licenses from those three companies. So the idea that the Soviet Union obtaining similar licenses somehow constitutes treason on the part of the company CEOs or US cabinet department secretaries is definitely off the wall.
In Chapter VI the author carries on how the USSR developed its post WW II rocket, missile, and jet airplane technologies from captured German technologies and scientists. This is news? The US did the same thing in the 1940s and 1950s.
In Chapter VII on Soviet missiles, he claims that the guidance systems for their ICBMs were manufactured using US supplied ball bearing equipment. In Appendix B, he makes several broad – brush statements such as “All Soviet automobile, truck, and engine technology comes from the West. All shipbuilding technology in the USSR comes directly or indirectly from the US or its NATO allies.” The problem I have with these statements (and many others in the book) is that Sutton offers no source citations or independent sources for these statements; he only cites as sources books that he has authored.
In Chapter XII on tanks, the author makes several claims that are just plain wrong or are distortions. For example (page 165), he claims that the diesel engine used in the T – 34 tank was developed from a German Maybach diesel engine. Well, I suppose this may actually be somewhat true – after all, the diesel engine was invented in Germany by Rudolf Diesel in the first place. I have also read other claims that the T – 34 diesel engine was derived from a French engine design. I guess it all depends on how you interpret the word “derived.” The T – 34 engine is an aluminum diesel engine and was a military technological first at the time of its development and use. The German and French designs were cast iron. Aluminum diesel engine design is quite different from cast iron designs – the cooling systems are totally different.
The author then makes further questionable statements when he discusses the “Christie – system torsion bar suspension” used on post WW II Soviet tanks. The Christie suspension system is NOT a torsion bar design; it uses a spring system. ALL tank and heavy military vehicle torsion bar suspension systems developed throughout the world are based on torsion bar systems originally designed in Czechoslovakia and Germany in the 1930s. The Soviets captured hundreds of damaged German Panzer II, Panther, and Tiger tanks during WW II, all of which used torsion bar suspensions; they would not have had to import torsion bar technology in order to use such suspension systems in their post – war tanks.
Page 164: he claims that the engine for the T - 34 tank is the same gasoline engine as was used in the US M – 3 medium tank and was an aero V – 12 Liberty engine. As noted above, he then claims that the T - 34 engine was a diesel engine developed from the Germans. Both of these statements are wrong – see above discussion.
Page 164 again: he claims that “Walter Christie … developed the Christie tank – the basis of World War II American tanks.” This is totally incorrect: the US Army rejected the Christie tank design.
Page 165: he claims that the Soviet T – 28 and T – 35 tanks “resembled” British tank models. I suppose they could; after all, tanks all over the world tend to “resemble” each other – but the Soviet tanks mentioned were not based on any British tank designs.
Page 166: he states “The latest T - 62s are manufactured in three gigantic plants at Nizhny Tagil, Omsk, and Kharkov.” This is wrong -- the T – 62 was manufactured only at Nizhny Tagil (although later it was manufactured in Poland and Czecheslovakia). The Kharkov plant built T – 54 and T - 64 tanks, which are completely different designs from the T -62. Omsk initially built heavy T - 10 tanks, although eventually production of heavy tanks ceased; in the 1980s, production at Omsk switched to the T – 80 tank (of which only a small number were made).
It is interesting to read the extent of foreign influences on Soviet industrial and military development. But after a while, it just gets irritating to read the author’s histrionics and never ending references to traitors, treason, and “deaf – mute –blind men” (his words) who sold equipment to the Soviets. In addition, the author’s numerous distortions and outright false statements inevitably lead an intelligent and knowledgeable reader to wonder about other statements and conclusions in the book.
For much more objective and balanced discussions of the former Soviet military industry and weapons manufacture and design, I suggest the following: “Soviet / Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices,” Institute for Defense Analysis (1995); “The Price of the Past” by Caddy (1996);”The Soviet Economy and the Red Army 1930 – 1945” by Dunn (1995); and “The Soviet Defense Industry” by Cooper (1991).
Most recent customer reviews
Get thee Educated and make it better.
fact-based work, published in 1986, but based on research undertaken
by the same author in throughout...Read more