ill fill this in next week iA

great book about how our constant involvement in war has shaped our country and us.

A fascinating well researched study of American history from a different, but important perspective. Worthy of any student of history's time

This book is massive in its scope, but very well done. I use this book in the classes I teach, especially in my colonial America section where I utilize their comparison approach and arguments about how the French & English mentalities and ways of interacting with the natives differed, in turn shaping American and native relations post Revolutionary War. Despite the long span of time they cover, the chapters still seem succinct, and the book is definitely effective and thought provoking for their overall argument.

Offering a critical look at US history by focusing on America (and Britain) as an expansive, imperial nation, Dominion of War provides a strong narrative with a necessary perspective. The authors really base their argument on the colonial period through the War of 1812 and the 20th century shift from territorial expansion to using intervention to control other countries. And, they take a biographical approach, telling their story through the examples of key figures like William Penn, George Washington, and Douglas MacArthur which adds a personal touch. I do wish, though, they had spent more time on the 18th century. The lighter touch actually made the book sag a bit.

I might have rated this book 4.5 stars, but decided to go the whole hog and ratchet it up to the five star club. Some people say that Anderson is one of the best historians of 18th-century America around. For example, I say that.

At any rate, this book is a highly readable re-interpretation of American/US history from the early 1600s through the Second Gulf War. It focuses on the importance of war and conquest in American history from the Champlain's alliance with the Algonguian peoples through the continuing compromises and conflicts expressed in the biographies of Penn, Washington, Jackson, Santa Ana, Grant, McCarthur and Colin Powell.

I'm not sure that I agree with all of Anderson and Clayton's arguments, but this book is an exciting and thought-provoking read.

I really loved reading this book sophomore Bryant history class. The professor was a great educator and he knew his subject extremely well.
I would not give this book 5 starts if it was not a very good book.
This US history book, from a military perspective, is a detailed look of the struggles, tactics, and eventual dominance of the US Army. (1500-1950)

Received as an Advance Reader, pre-publication, in galley and loved it.

Interesting thesis, but tries to do too much and gets lost in the details.

Anderson claims that Americans are raised to beleive that three wars matter- The Revolutionary War, that made America, the Civil War, that saved America, and WWII, where America saved the world. We are conditioned to believe that the other wars (banana republics, spanish American, etc) were irregularities. Anderson's major thesis is that this is exactly wrong- that the 'little wars' are the ones that show the true character of America, and those three major 'moral imperative' wars are the aberration. He tells the story through biographies of powerful cators, actors that overlap, moving from de Champlaign, to Penn to Franklin, Washington, etc (Jackson was probably my favorite. But I kind of enjoy the idea of electing lunatics, so there's that). He finishes with Colin Powell. All in all, a well-crafted piece of history that should be included with Zinn's People's History. The more I think about this book, the more impressed I am about it.

This was an enlightening and thought-provoking volume on US expansionism from the pre-Revolutionary period to the Gulf War. The authors examine the topic by means of focusing on the choices and stories of individual historical actors in some key moments in our history, such as Gen. Washington, Wm. Penn, Andrew Jackson, Grant, MacArthur, and Colin Powell. The recurring theme of the conquest of N. America so as to bring the Anglo-American concept of "order" to what was regarded as a chaotic, disorderly, wilderness, is shown to continue as the justification for every campaign that is examined. The idea of bringing order, democracy, freedom, mostly by means of war, conquest, occupation, is continually used by the government to justify expansionist or imperialist wars. The authors demonstrate how the military stepping-stones are thus justified, from the wars of the 1st half of the 19th century, to those of the early 20th century, including the Philippine component of the Spanish-American War, to the present era, since the language of freedom could be applied to wars "liberating" various foreign countries from despotic or colonial rule, as well as wars vs Native Americans, Mexicans, and Canadians. The irony the authors trace is that the language of our republican values is just as easily applied to justify one imperial war after another, including long-term occupations of various Caribbean island states, various Central American countries, the Philippines, post-war Japan, etc. The conclusion drawn is that Americans will consent to fight wars once they are couched in these terms, whether or not the actual motive or end result is the "liberation" of various countries. The authors demonstrate the irony of forcing countries to accept our concept of "freedom" and "democracy" at gunpoint - how that process has sometimes been oblivious of local traditions of governance. The drive to duplicate our system overseas remains the basis of many of our wars, whether or not the conquered country is in a position, as far as development, education, and so forth, to have a democratic form of government.

Argues for a new narrative of U.S. history. The usual narrative hinges on two major wars up to the 20th century: the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. This book argues for the importance of imperial wars, which created instability and led to revolutions: the Seven Years War (called the French and Indian War in North America), 1754-63, led to the Revolutionary War, and the Mexican War (1846-48) led to the Civil War after the huge new territory acquired following the conquest of Mexico led to a great increase in sectional tensions in the U.S. over the issue of extending slavery to the territories. Given the current U.S. presence in Iraq, this book is timely in its depiction of most U.S. warfare as imperialistic and fought in the name of spreading freedom.