The War Lust

So it has admittedly been a while.  But the Opinion Company is back!  Let's review some stuff....

Book: The War Lovers: Roosevelt, Lodge, Hearst, and the Rush to Empire, 1898
Published: 1 edition (April 27, 2010)      480 pages
Rating: 3 of 5

Evan Thomas has authored a new and intriguing read on the events and players that lead America into war with Spain. I always enjoy historical information so I was excitied to read this one. After reading though, I have very mixed feelings.
On one hand Mr. Thomas does a great job in following the events (some even very minute) which lead to the conflict. He is unflinching when he points out the obvious war lust and blatant racism that drove the nation into a war that could've been avoided. I am more of a Civil War buff so it was nice to learn about this war in depth. I didn't honestly know a lot about it before picking up this book.
Another positive aspect is how in depth the author gets into the main characters. It was easily understandable and paints a very interesting picture of men like William Randolph Hearst and Thomas Reed. One can't help but wonder what would've happened if he had been elected president?

With all of the good points of the book though, I was also a little put off by a couple things. First and foremost there is a little too much conjecture in the book for me. I'm not saying that Mr. Thomas doesn't has some valid points. But some of it is a little confusing. I'm not really sure why William James is mentioned so thoroughly in the book. I'm assuming it is because he is an example of one of the deep thinkers in the USA at that time. So we get an insight into the mind of the intellectuals? Still doesn't really add to the book that much in my opinion.
And with a couple other reviewers I have to agree, I was wondering where was the comparison with the Bush administration. The book alludes to the idea that the Gulf War (the second one) corresponds with the push for war with Spain. But I really don't think it adds to the book. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, but I don't think the author does a good job of proving his point either way. He should have chosen to put the idea to the fore and made backing points or he should've just dropped the idea completely.

PROS: Very insightful and in depth. Well researched. Lots of nice photographs give you a nice historical snapshot.
CONS: Seems to be a lot of conjecture in the book. Author alludes to a lot of background theories but doesn't really clearly state them.
BOTTOM LINE: Definitely a good addition to any readers bookshelf who is a history buff or enjoys following historical politics