Negative Positive
Title: mostly sloppy and uniformed with a few good bits
Review: Ambrose writes in a mostly accessible style which is not a bad thing, but this book is a mish mash of different magazine pieces that have virtually nothing in common and are quite uneven in quality. Further, some of his work is just pure opinion based on almost no real scholarship, (his arguments about the bombing of japan or the cold war come to mind). For armchair historians who think they "know" alot about history, Ambrose is the man, unfortunately his unfaultering US boosterism which results in obvious, moth-worn and erroneous conclusions will not really appeal to anyone else.
Is the review positive or negative? 