Title: Same Old Crap About Longstreet, Despite the Evidence
Product review: This would be a great reference book if not for the same tiring rethoric about Gen. Longstreet. This book was published in 2003 and references the more recent works by historians that show Longstreet was not responsible for failure of the attacks on the second and third day. Makes you wonder if the author suffers from a acute case of Lost Cause tunnel vision.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
