Spring Deals Automotive Children of Blood and Bone New-season heels nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Stream your favorites. Amazon music Unlimited. Learn more. GNO for Samsung S9 Fire TV Stick: $29.99. Offer ends 3/26/18 Grocery Handmade Personalized Jewelry Home and Garden Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon TheGrandTour TheGrandTour TheGrandTour  Echo Fire tablets: Designed for entertainment Kindle Paperwhite AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Shop now TG18SW_gno

on December 9, 2013
Endorsing this book requires ignoring basic military protocols, suspending the laws of physics, and disregarding the capabilities of the human body. This review of Mr. Luttrell's supposed non-fiction work will be confined to his last operation in Afghanistan, and based on his words. While reading, I made five pages of notes, but I'll not include ALL of that here. What follows is the abbreviated version. Had this book been billed as fiction, I would never have read it. It may be asking too much, but the author's story is best evaluated through a soldier's eyes and experience--but, common sense should be sufficient.

What do we know about this operation for certain? Mr. Luttrell and three other SEALs were inserted into the mountains of Afghanistan, made contact with the enemy, and only Mr. Luttrell was not KIA. Much of the author's account presents difficulties for two reasons:

1. His words make clear a lack of professionalism and simple soldierly common sense;
2. His account of the running firefight is too demanding of the reader's credulity.

His team had a "bad feeling" about the mission, and so took an additional three magazines (Why not more?) apiece for their main personal weapon. The author noted that they were traveling light (carrying 45 lbs.). Yet, they decline to take along an M-60 machine gun because of the weight (Additionally, though not mentioned, all of the team members would have had to carry extra ammo for the machine gun). That excuse is laughable; it is a non-reason and an illegitimate one in the military. While these issues reveal an oddly unprofessional attitude, they are minor compared to what follows in Mr. Luttrell's account. It appears to me that they did not respect their enemy. Mr. Luttrell is very clear that he considers the enemy as ill-trained, crazed, fanatical and murderous cutthroats.

The author makes a point that this operation would require stealth more than at any time in his career. Yet, hours after being inserted, they were still wandering around, now, in the daylight. What about a small thing such as noise discipline? He and his team members were laughing and cursing, throwing berries and distracting the guy on guard. Basic trainees are more disciplined.

Taking the SEALs completely by surprise, a couple of Afghani goatherds actually penetrate the SEALs' position. So, what to do with them? Surely, the mission has been compromised, has it not? The SEALs crudely debate the idea of killing the Afghani civilians in cold blood. Because the officer in command is incapable of making a decision on his own, they try to communicate with HQ for guidance. That effort fails so they vote: Kill them or let them go? (The civilians could not be tied up because as Mr. Luttrell lamely explains, they did not have rope. My God, the equipment of four men could have provided ties.) To put it mildly, all of this does not reflect well on the OIC, or his team. A wise officer seeks opinions from his experienced subordinates, but voting? This officer should have known immediately that killing unarmed civilians is out of the question and done his duty. In any case, the SEALs released their prisoners and moved a few hundred meters away--mission continues.

When the SEAL team starts taking enemy fire, they respond as any disciplined unit would: they get down and return fire. Mr. Luttrell is the main character in this firefight. It is he who initiates the firefight, it is he who sees his comrades get hit, it is he alone who witnesses the act which wins his commander the CMH, it is he who while dragging a wounded SEAL to safety (after dropping his weapon, thereby reducing his unit's defensive fire to 50%), is confronted by a smiling enemy soldier a few meters distant and about to kill them both, when in the nick of time, another SEAL drills the smiling Afghan between the eyes--perfect.

All this time, according to Mr. Luttrell, the SEALs are taking uninterrupted heavy fire (AK, grenade, RPG) from a larger enemy force. But how much larger? The numbers are wildly inconsistent. Mr. Luttrell strongly suggests about 200 Taliban soldiers were engaged. Other sources, including the commendation he received, indicate far fewer. (One important authority puts the number of enemy at 8-10 men. Mr. Luttrell's four-man unit placed themselves in a textbook, tactically worst-case, position; a single enemy firing on their position could have been fatal to one or more of the SEALs.) Is it likely that Mr. Luttrell could have been so acutely aware of the details among the SEALs? Or, is it more likely that he was pouring fire on targets to his front, and only vaguely aware of what was going on to his left and right? In a small-unit firefight, even a squad leader barely knows what is going on except to yell out very basic commands. Memory is another casuality when adrenalin, action and excitement have taken over a soldier's being. Mr. Luttrell does not seem to have any memory loss.

The SEALs had to fall back to avoid being overrun. Unfortunately, they had to truly take a leap of faith because their first fallback position was at the end of an unknown steep slope. They threw themselves down the first slope and continued the fight. Eventually, three of the SEALs are killed. Finally, Mr. Luttrell is alone, and for the moment safe enough to take a breather. To get to this point Mr. Luttrell threw himself down 6 - 9 (I actually stopped counting) different steep slopes/cliffs--All without a broken bone or the loss of his weapon. After a number of these lucky falls, he addresses the reader and accepts that he might not be believed--which is a reasonable expectation. What is the probability that falling down a steep hill, multiple times, with an unsecured weapon will result in no injuries and a weapon close at hand? The author tells us that God literally intervened to save him--again, multiple times!

Given the picture painted by Mr. Luttrell, his four-man team made serious tactical mistakes. Furthermore, they did not understand their enemy, and worse, they did not respect that enemy.

There is much more to say about Mr. Luttrell's story, but I am so disgusted by it that I'll not continue examining it. Mr. Luttrell's false narrative, reveals a man with the judgement and temperament of a benighted ten-year-old. Bravado, necessary during training, is quickly discarded in the field when facing a real enemy. But, the author has an incapacity in this regard, and so constructs a fantasy. In addition to his stunted character, his conduct, too, may be questionable. In this connection, I am reminded of another Marcus--Major Marcus Reno of Custer's regiment in 1876; He did not acquit himself well as a soldier during the Little Bighorn fight. He survived, but his life forever after was ugly and ended badly.

Finally, I would like to ask the reader where is the heroism of this small unit of SEALs? If you accept the word of Mr. Luttrell about the sacrifice of his commanding officer, what was heroic about the actions of the remaining three SEALs? After exhibiting unforgivable incompetence, they simply did their duty. They did their job--they fought--too late. Sadly, for our side, they paid the logical and predictable price for their failures. Let us not forget, too, that this team's failures caused the deaths of close to twenty other American servicemen. Despite our not knowing how Mr. Luttrell avoided paying that price in full, the dead deserve our respect, affection, admiration and a Purple Heart.
3838 comments| 74 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on October 29, 2007
Great book, but, as a Marine Corps infantry officer and combat veteran, some things concern me about the account. Specifically:

1. How do three goatherds and a gaggle of goats with bells around their necks get to within 4 feet of a 4 man SEAL team without being noticed?

2. Why did they let the goatherds go? Why not abort the mission and take them with them to the extraction point and then let them go after the helicopters had arrived? Why not abort the mission and bind their hands and feet and immediately depart for the extraction point?

3. Why did they let them go and then stick around? An odd decsion given that they knew their position and mission was compromised.

4. Why debate about killing them? Difficult to imagine that there would be a "vote" in the the military - especially a highly disciplined SEAL team - dropped behind enemy lines -- specifically designated and trained to avoid such encounters. However, should such a contingency occur, SEALS are specifically trained to deal with them. A vote?

5. Axelson receives a "mortal head wound," but puts a bandage on himself and then passes a message to stay alive and tell his wife he loves her? Ever seen a mortal head wound?

6. How come the Commander was frantically asking a Petty Officer what they should do in a combat situation? That is his role and responsibility. I understand the roles of the various SEAL team members, but an experienced SEAL Commander asking for advice during combat?

7. Why did Cmdr Murphy go into the clearing to use his cell telephone to call for help when Luttrell later uses his EPIRB (Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon) to indicate his position to air craft? Every SEAL carries and EPIRB and all they have to do is hit the button and the whole military world knows they are in trouble and comes running. Four SEALS activating their EPIRBs would have brought every aircraft and weapon within 1000 miles into their area of operation. And the satellite based EPIRB reception is FAR superior to any cell telephone.

8. Cmdr Murphy makes his call, gets shot through the back so that Luttrell can see his "chest blow out," but then picks up his weapon and telephone and comes back to fight? Ever seen a man get shot in the back?

9. Why did he wait so long to use the cell telephone? I understand that he wanted to avoid to detection. After being discovered, that was no longer a concern.

9. Why does Luttrell, the lone survivor now hiding in a rock crevasse and having successfully evaded the search party for more than 8 hours, shoot three weapons carrying men from more than 150 yards away and across a valley? They had not seen him and seem to pose no immediate threat. Yet he shoots all three of them at the risk of compromising his position and bringing more than 60 more to bear on his position that he knows are out there looking for him. SEALs are trained at covert reconnaissance. The last thing they want to do is reveal their position. They are specialized in escape and evasion. Those three shots were noisy and very risky.

I am sure there are answers to these concerns, but it is an unusual and incomplete account for those wishing to understand the details of this specific combat action and not just the story of these heroic actions by an heroic SEAL team.

Nevertheless, an exceptional story of heroism and sacrifice.
2424 comments| 103 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on September 5, 2007
I do not question the Luttrell's patriotism but his book poorly reflects the American values the author's supposed to be defending in the first place. When Uncle Sam sends you abroad to mete foreign policy from the barrel of a gun, and you return in the middle of an ongoing war and publish a book that's going to be distributed internationally, citizens can rightfully expect a more intelligent and considered account, not a sensationalistic apologia in the form of a partisan rag. Judging from the stellar reviews, at least at Amazon, the average reviewer has lower expectations. While co-written with a ghost writer Luttrell's name is on the cover: it's his responsibility. Here he can't assign blame for his mission's failure (the supposed subject of the book, his eye-witness account), neither on the liberals, nor on the media. These are the author's bêtes noires, though it's hard to imagine how the "liberals" are responsible for our military's Rules of Engagement, while the same media he's demonizing is the very tool he's exploiting to promote the book and seal a Hollywood film deal (one hopes Luttrell, a self-proclaimed good Christian, will donate his royalties and proceeds to the next-of-kin of the brave Americans who died that day, and the brave Afghan villagers who saved his life). Many Amazon reviewers claim this is the "best" book they've ever read which says what it says about Luttrell's core audience. It makes you wonder what they've been reading because Luttrell's book is a font of the sort of mean-spirited 'my country right or wrong' nonsense. Luttrell's account reflects poorly on himself and, sadly, upon on everyone and everything he proudly associates himself with: SEALs, special forces, the US military, the CIC, the War on Terror, the United States ... Thankfully and ironically those who come out clean are the supposed subjects of whom "Luttrell" doesn't really say much, those he claims are the reason for his writing, those he says he seeks to immortalize: his brothers-in-arms. Luttrell is so focused on himself and his family, twin karma, all-you-can-eat free-food vigils and all things Texan that you'll read more about American hero and Medal of Honor recipient Lt. Michael P. Murphy, USN, in a one or two page news article than you will in Luttrell's entire book. Why didn't Luttrell devote a page or two to each of the 19 or so brave men who perished that day in battle and attempting to save the team? It's such a glaring omission that one supposes the next of kin dissociated themselves from the project. Instead of delivering on his promise -- immortalizing his blood brothers -- Luttrell preaches hate to a narrow and reactionary audience. He believes his readership is more interested in hearing him whine and assign the blame for his mission's failure on the "media" and the "liberals". Mr. Luttrell: making money selling a book that sows and fuels disunity in an already divided nation during wartime isn't, to say it politely, the right thing to do. Regarding the content of the account, the pantingly childish, pious and sensational approach to what is supposed to be factual material raises more questions than it answers. How did Luttrell emerge relatively unscathed while his comrades were, according to his account, shot to pieces? Why did these professionals blunder? They went into an area where they knew they'd be vastly outnumbered, yet they were out of touch from the start. Why was the team's ability to communicate so patchy? What was their brief? Take on 200 trained Taliban fighters with four rifles? Hide in plain view? What did they and or their commanders expect? Why isn't this sufficiently explained? Why did these professionals, who had been operating in the area and were accustomed to false insertions, why did they leave the fast ropes? Luttrell omits important information. Access to video taken by the Taliban enemy is readily available on the internet. When the team was immediately discovered by goat herders they had no means to bind them, yet the SEALs were lugging amongst other things a laptop computer filled with sensitive data, their I.D. cards, etc. Again, Luttrell's narrow-minded narrative raises questions but doesn't provide satisfactory answers. Why didn't Lt. Murphy abort the mission when they were located by the goat herders? Lt. Murphy's alleged decision to put the fate of the goat herders up to a vote, if indeed that ever happened, is baffling and appalling. The Navy is not a democracy. The team leader was an officer for a reason. Is this how the SEALs operate? I think not; I truly hope not. (On a lighter note, perhaps the whole book project is some kind of sick joke designed to disinform for the enemy.) What happened to the rescuers who died? How was their rescue effort organized and executed? What happened to the target? What happened to Luttrell's saviors, Americans and Afghans? There is no satisfying epilogue and one must again assume that Luttrell was neither interested nor grateful enough to find out. This reader expected a mature, thoughtful account with a nod to lessons-learned. Instead Luttrell's book is an off-key, self-righteous, finger-pointing rearguard defense for ... a fiasco. Mark Bowden, who probably didn't serve in the military, who probably is neither Texan nor Republican, not that it makes any difference, wrote a stunning account of another military blunder called "Black Hawk Down" and it's the sort of richly insightful and humane account that makes you proud of our most capable and dedicated servicemen and servicewomen. Not Luttrell's book. I doubt the manuscript was provided to the Navy or the White House prior to publication. As other reviewers have already suggested, wait for a more objective, critical and complete account of the events.
2020 comments| 33 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on August 27, 2007
This book rubbed me the wrong way. Luttrell and his three Navy SEAL team members deserve our love and gratitude for their valor, no question. My problem with the book is the way Luttrell digresses from his story to blame the "liberal media" for his team's disastrous mission and the deaths of his three comrades.

Briefly, the four stumbled upon an adult and two teenage goat herders - all of them unarmed - high in the Hindu Kush soon after deploying on their mission to capture/assassinate a known Taliban leader. Having satisfied themselves the three were not Taliban, the SEALS opted not to kill them and sent them on their way. Soon after, the team was ambushed by more 150-200 Taliban and fought a heroic but desparate battle against unimaginable odds. Only Luttrell escaped. He was taken in, fed, cared for and protected by local villagers until his rescue by Army Rangers.

Luttrell cast the deciding vote sparing the lives of the goat herders, who apparently tipped off the Taliban, and is is now wracked by sleepless guilt. He lays the blame for the deaths of his three comrades on military rules of engagement prohibiting the killing of unarmed civilians. Moreover, he faults the U.S. media and "Liberals" for these rules, asserting that they are unrealistic in a war zone like Afghanistan where civilians and combatants are indistinguishable.

The book is laced throughout with gratuitous assaults on "politicians," "the media," "Liberals" and "Lefties" whom he argues are more concerned about amorphous, "so-called human rights" than the lives of soldiers sent into conflict without the necessary leeway to kill at will. Luttrell claims he would have voted to shoot the goat herders had he not been fearful of vilification by the press and prosecution in the courts.

This is where I part company. If Luttrell has problems with military rules of engagement he shouldn't be in the Navy SEALS - or any other branch of the U.S. military. The rules may be inconvenient; they may even cause U.S. casualties, but they stand for what we as Americans are about and what he was fighting to defend. We do not kill unarmed civilians. The Taliban does; al Queda does, but we do not because that is what makes us better than them.

There are practical as well as moral reasons for this, but Luttrell doesn't dwell on those either. Nowhere does he stop to consider whether the villagers who saved him would have been so inclined if U.S. forces killed as wantonly as he believes they should be allowed to.

Luttrell's complaint with military rules of engagement rests more properly with the White House and Pentagon that sent him to Afghanistan, not the "liberal media" he relentlessly vilifies. He might also do well to consider where his command and his team may have gone wrong.

The team deployed after two false starts because of faulty intelligence that proved faulty again. The team was apparently unaware that the terrain they were traversing was frequented by goat herders and blew its cover almost immediately. Its radio communications failed inexplicably when they came under attack and was desperately needed. A working radio set - or a backup, for that matter - could have saved them.

One even wonders what Navy SEALS were doing were doing high in the Himalayas in the first place; their training and strength is in amphibious assaults. I found it sadly ironic that Luttrell's four-man team of SEALS was discovered within a day of being deployed while the 20-man team of Rangers sent to rescue them went undetected for nearly a week.

But Luttrell doesn't dwell on that either.
2121 comments| 36 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on June 23, 2007
Let me start by saying, even though I'm well past my prime, I'm a big, tough guy. I've been in more than my share of rough situations. What I'm trying to say here is, it's not easy to get me to water up. But this book had me sobbing before I even finished the introduction. Unless you're just absolute pond scum that has no compassion whatsoever for our military, be forewarned this book will definitely have you wiping your eyes more than a few times.
Author Patrick Robinson conveys Petty Officer Luttrell's story magnificently. He is to be commended. You will flip through these pages in a day or two and be unable to put this one down.
I'm not going to spend much time on the story itself. Just read the book. You'll not find many more graphic descriptions of such things as an almost incomprehensible training regimen, the unique brotherhood that develops among men who have trained and fought together (particularly special forces), courage under fire and an incredible network of support for a fallen loved one.
You will have a plethora of personal emotions exposed. For me, I think what drove hardest upon my psyche is the intense hatred I feel after reading this book, not of the Taliban and Al Queda (although they rank right up there in the I freakin' hate your guts department), but rather of two entities right here in America; the National media and the U.S. Congress. This mission cost us twenty-three of our very finest, and those two entities are directly responsible for their deaths and countless others. They should all have their ROE shoved right up their backsides.
Not since our government disbanded the great American military fighting force of WWII in 1945 have they given the military the support needed to win wars. Sure they've provided the proper equipment and training, but then they have sent our troops into battle time after time with their hands tied behind their backs. The guys in Korea got a taste of it. We damned sure got plenty of it in Nam. They sort of allowed the guys in Gulf War I to do their job, but now, it's just over the top.
And then you've got the piece of [...] news media. 98% of those pukes ought to be ,.... Well, okay, I'm ranting now and not reviewing, so let me get a grip. In war there is always an army defending freedom and an army seeking to destroy freedom. Whichever army wins will determine the difference between freedom and slavery for that nation. It's obvious which side many in the news media and in Washington D.C. are pulling for.
Marcus Luttrell is a true American hero. As are his fallen team members. I am thankful Marcus is a U.S. Navy Seal. I am thankful he decided to make this story known. I am thankful to my grandchildren for giving me this book for Father's Day. I have several new names and families to hold in my prayers.
4343 comments| 320 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on October 11, 2007
I respect Luttrell and what he did, I don't respect the fact that he has used his story, in part, to push an obvious agenda.

I spent a year in Eastern Afghanistan as an infantryman and have been on OPs (observations posts) that were compromised. In Afghanistan it's virtually impossible not to be compromised. In these instances, murdering (I am not going to mesh words by calling it anything else) Afghani civilians was never an option. There are legitimate concerns about the ROE (rules of engagement), but this is not one of them. In no way is it ever permissible to shoot unarmed civilians based upon the assumption that they might bring harm upon you later on. Contrary to some people's perception, combat is not an "anything goes" environment where soldiers can shoot first and ask questions later. Nor should it be. The ROE exists for a specific reason, and it has nothing to do political correctness. I'll spare anyone a lecture about the more subtle points of counterinsurgency tactics; but if anyone is curious about why we have a ROE, they should read General Petraeus' (remember him?) book, which makes the best and most articulate case for the ROE.

I am not sure why Luttrell chose to blame a political ideology for what happened to his team, but I was disappointed that he would claim that, if but for the liberals, it would ever be morally or legally acceptable to shoot unarmed civilians. The fact that the Afghans most likely went on to compromise their position is simply a hard fact of fighting an insurgency. Luttrell surely was aware of this when he volunteered to join a high speed unit that was created to operate in exactly these circumstances, and I'd be surprised if the SEALs had not planned for this exact contingency in depth. As an infantry scout, I know we considered, planned, and rehearsed actions upon contact and actions upon soft compromise.

To the inevitable flames that will be incoming, I'll say that I usually don't believe in second guessing the actions of the people in the field. However, Luttrell chose to publish his story and was paid to do so. That puts this manner in the public square and opens the issue up for discussion. Thus, while I respect Luttrell, I found the book to be a bit heavy handed for my taste. I would have personally enjoyed it more if Luttrell would have simply told his story with less bluster and political commentary.
5150+ comments| 593 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on June 12, 2007
Luttrell's endurance, bravery, and self sacrifice are undeniable. Hats off to him for his actions in Kunar. Readers should know, however, that the man who saved Luttrell, the Afghani Muhammed Gulab, got dumped unceremoniously by Luttrell, the SEALs, Coalition forces, and the U.S. For helping to save Luttrell Gulab came under the threat of death from the Tali and was forced to leave his village, never to return. He is a simple wood merchant. He fled to Asadabad where he was given menial work at the Coalition base there. Luttrell, according to Gulab, promised him money to resettle himself and his family. He never received a sou. Later, he tried to get in touch with Luttrell, to no avail. Calls and emails were not returned. Worse still, when he talked about these issues with a Newsweek correspondent based in Islamabad, American forces incarcerated him at the Asadabad base for days, interrogating him without ever telling him what he had done to deserve such treatment; his questioners wanted to know why he had talked to Newsweek about unfulfilled promises. He was terrified. He remains confused. His life is in ruins. He can't go home. He was too afraid for his life even to visit the village for his mother's funeral. If he had saved your life -- as he did Luttrell's -- you surely would do everything in your power to repay Gulab. Wouldn't you? Has Luttrell given or even pledged any of his book advance and royalties to Gulab? Gulab doesn't think so. Luttrell in the book says he offered his wristwatch and money but Gulab refused. Please. Luttrell should not insult the readers' intelligence. The sum I heard was $20,000. Never to be fulfilled. Long forgotten. This is a hearts-and-minds issue. Counter-insurgency can never succeed if we treat people as Gulab has been treated. And one last point: Gulab says he helped Luttrell less out of compassion than because he reckoned that the Coalitiion forces would not bomb his village in retaliation for the attacks on the Redwing team if the village helped one Redwing team member to survive. Guess what? Once Luttrell was safe again, Coalition forces bombed Gulab's village, killing 17 civilians, women and children. Commanders at Bagram later apologized to President Kharzai who had demanded an explanation. Luttrell did a good job getting himself out of a tight spot, but the aftertaste of Redwing is somewhat bitter, and should be known and told.
2121 comments| 36 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on March 14, 2014
I am a former Marine and took up this book with gusto. A few pages into his ghost written story claiming to be doing "God's work" killing people for the president left me wondering where the hell he was taking me with his outrageous bravado, flag waving, liberal hating, and George Bush praising. Nobody doubts for a second that SEALs are the best there is. But he reminds of this on every page ad naseum The action part was engrossing but his constant bragging and buddy worshiping wore me down. I could not get past half way and tossed it out. Murder is not a game Marcus for you to praise. Show some humanity because you are a brain washed killer without remorse. And the worst of it is, like Viet-nam, your buddies died in vain for a government hell bent on retaliation. When we leave Afghanistan it will have been for nothing and good men and civilians were sacrificed for what? For what? In the end Afghanistan will revert to tribal warfare and the country returns to the Stone Age while our cost for the noble effort is a trillion give or take dollars.
1919 comments| 90 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on July 7, 2007
The title of the book creates lofty expectations. "Lone Survivor"...SEAL teams...Afghanistan. It should be hard-hitting and packed to the gills with action, right? Well, sort of. The book takes a good four chapters to get started. We hear about the author's childhood, his SEAL training days, and how everybody and everything involved with SEALs are amazing -- all before we even get to Afghanistan. Over half the book is spent here.
Toss in frequent complaints about 'liberal media" and repeated and tiresome complaints about rules of engagement and the book isn't starting off to well.

When the team lands in Afghanistan, the tempo picks up. They embark on missions into the mountains, encounter bad guys, and do what SEAL teams do. The story becomes more involved and even a bit suspenseful. When they are tasked with finding and killing a certain bad guy, the book becomes gripping. I couldn't put it down when the SEAL team engaged with the bad guys. The entire firefight section of the book -- which spans multiple chapters -- had me hooked.

The book takes a surprising twist in the later chapters of the book -- after the primary firefight. I won't describe the twist but it kept the suspense levels high throughout the remainder of the book.

Sadly, the author's writing style wasn't up to the job. While the plot itself was compelling, the author's incessant need to make everything "super", "great", "amazing" or some other synonym was maddening. It sounded like the author was trying to hype up everything and everybody. If there is any organization that does NOT need to be hyped, it is the SEAL teams.

Finally, this book has portions that almost sound like propaganda. The author frequent complains about liberal media and how they are on a crusade to "get" members of the U.S. Military. He complains about media coverage of Abu Gharab (sp) and how the U.S. Military is being forced to fight with one arm tied behind their backs. These types of complaints are sprinkled throughout the book -- which makes them hard to avoid. While the author might have a point, I didn't buy this book to hear his complaints about liberal media -- I wanted to hear about SEAL team firefights in Afghanistan.

Overall, the plot was great. The writing style and frequent complaints weren't. Would suggest waiting until the paperback as this story isn't worth the $13-$24.95 hardcover price.
1919 comments| 85 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on August 9, 2007
Poor planning does not make you a hero. nor does killing unarmed civilians, which not only is against the geneva convention, but immoral, and no officer worth his salt would consider this as a viable option, mush less put it to a vote. This book fails on many levels. Why did they not have blood chits? why did they have secret information with them? they did not need it. watch the video on youtube. Where were their contingencies? commo failure, compromise, QRF? And why is this guy so full of himself?
This is a poorly written book by another SEAL among many who have no understanding of todays battlefield. They ignored all the intel which was available and took a mission SF turned down. This mission was a series of horrible decisions, the results of which the author blames on the liberal media.
2222 comments| 37 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse