Review: Great idea, poor execution.
Rating: 1 out of 5
Date: 11 4, 2012
Yoshida has a great idea, but his execution is a failure.  Contrary to another reviewer, this is not a right-wing dream.  The book wanders quite a bit ideologically.Frankly, the writing is that of a graduate student who is passionate about a subject, but lacks the skill to express himself well.  Yoshida's tone runs the gamut from a few witty remarks to an attempt to be highbrow pseudo-textbook.  A specific example of this is a sentence at 72%:"However, in the days after the change of governments in London, it had become increasing clear that - while the British government wished to offer them financial aid and clandestine military assistance, they neither had nor were prepared to offer even if they did the sort of substantial military aid that might actually lift the siege that they now found themselves under."This was ONE sentence.  I didn't have to look hard to pick one out.  They're everywhere in the text.  There are also significant editing issues with the book.  It's as if the author ran it through spell check, accepted every recommended change, and published.  No serious effort was made to proof-read the book.The exhaustively detailed battles and unit names (which mean nothing to any casual reader) don't add credibility to the book.  It merely appears as if Yoshida spends an inordinate and perverse amount of intimate time with his annual Jane's books.I could not provide a spoiler ending if I wanted to:  the book has NO ending.  Yoshida may hope to publish a sequel... but it would be a waste of his time and ours.