What do you think?
Rate this book
Invading Mexico: America's Continental Dream and the Mexican War, 1846-1848
Popular historian Joseph Wheelan recounts James Polk’s strategy of last resort for prying California away from Mexico. He had tried to buy it; he had instructed his agents to encourage a settlers’ revolt. When these measures failed, the impatient president, while cynically condemning Mexico’s anger over America’s annexation of Texas, sent General Zachary Taylor’s army to the Rio Grande River, into territory that Mexico claimed as hers. By provocatively sending Taylor there, the president got his war — and, as bitter corollaries, the scathing criticism of congressional leaders on moral grounds, and Mexico’s lasting distrust of its powerful northern neighbor.
The Mexican War was America’s first truly modern war. Steamships ferried troops, daguerreotypes captured the spectacle of infantry and cavalry marching off to battle, newspapermen reported from the front lines for the first time, and telegraphs helped speed news of victories to eager readers back home. For the first time, large numbers of the regular Army’s field-grade officers were West Point-trained.
Weapons technology advances such as the mobile field artillery, the Colt six-shooter and the Sharp’s Rifle gave the U.S. Army daunting firepower. These advantages ensured victory even when Mexican troops outnumbered the Americans by as much as 4-to-1.
The Mexican War was America’s first truly modern war. Steamships ferried troops, daguerreotypes captured the spectacle of infantry and cavalry marching off to battle, newspapermen reported from the front lines for the first time, and telegraphs helped speed news of victories to eager readers back home. For the first time, large numbers of the regular Army’s field-grade officers were West Point-trained.
Weapons technology advances such as the mobile field artillery, the Colt six-shooter and the Sharp’s Rifle gave the U.S. Army daunting firepower. These advantages ensured victory even when Mexican troops outnumbered the Americans by as much as 4-to-1.
492 pages, Hardcover
First published March 7, 2007
2 people are currently reading
96 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
December 27, 2025
A solid, well-written history of the Mexican War.
Wheelan thoroughly covers the war’s origins, the political conflict involved, and the failed negotiations between the US and Mexico prior to the war. Along the way, Wheelan describes what the time period was like, writing of such innovations as the penny press. He ably describes how America’s regular and volunteer forces were mobilized and led, and the experience of ordinary soldiers. He also clearly explains the political conflicts between Polk and his generals, and between regulars and volunteers. Wheelan’s description of the campaigns is fairly vivid and the narrative has a nice flow to it. Wheelan’s research is thorough and based almost entirely on primary sources.
The campaigns are mostly given good treatment, even if most of them are covered in only a few pages, and the number of maps felt inadequate. For some reason, only the battles of Monterey, Buena Vista, and the Mexico City campaign receive their own maps, and pretty bad ones at that. Wheelan’s treatment of the political scene in Mexico is lacking, and the Mexican perspective of the war is also sparse. The narrative is a bit disjointed, with short sections of one, two, or three paragraphs transitioning awkwardly to the next. Also, at one point, when discussing the Gadsden Purchase of 1853, Wheelan writes that Jefferson Davis was secretary of state.
A fine, all-around history.
Wheelan thoroughly covers the war’s origins, the political conflict involved, and the failed negotiations between the US and Mexico prior to the war. Along the way, Wheelan describes what the time period was like, writing of such innovations as the penny press. He ably describes how America’s regular and volunteer forces were mobilized and led, and the experience of ordinary soldiers. He also clearly explains the political conflicts between Polk and his generals, and between regulars and volunteers. Wheelan’s description of the campaigns is fairly vivid and the narrative has a nice flow to it. Wheelan’s research is thorough and based almost entirely on primary sources.
The campaigns are mostly given good treatment, even if most of them are covered in only a few pages, and the number of maps felt inadequate. For some reason, only the battles of Monterey, Buena Vista, and the Mexico City campaign receive their own maps, and pretty bad ones at that. Wheelan’s treatment of the political scene in Mexico is lacking, and the Mexican perspective of the war is also sparse. The narrative is a bit disjointed, with short sections of one, two, or three paragraphs transitioning awkwardly to the next. Also, at one point, when discussing the Gadsden Purchase of 1853, Wheelan writes that Jefferson Davis was secretary of state.
A fine, all-around history.
February 18, 2017
The book covers the U.S. territorial expansion under President Polk (1844-1848). Polk, who pledged just a single term, had campaigned on a platform to annex Texas, which had earlier broken away from Mexico, and to get the Oregon Territory question resolved. But Polk’s real objective was California, especially with its West coast port (San Francisco). The New Mexico Territory (Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Utah) was, initially at least, of secondary interest.
Polk was Jeffersonian in policy (land for the yeoman farmers to counter the eastern establishment) and Jacksonian in approach (rules, honesty and fair play were secondary to accomplishing an objective). By the end of his term, Polk had settled the Oregon Territory issue with England (present-day BC border), Texas had become incorporated into the Union (with Rio Grande as its border), and upper California (current border with Baja California) and the New Mexico Territory (the aforementioned states) were obtained. Under Polk’s presidency, 1.2 million square miles of territory were brought under the administration of the U.S. The Department of Interior was created to administer these lands.
The land from Mexico was acquired through the U.S. military invasion that ended with the U.S. occupation of Mexico City. This military campaign, the author says, resulted in the highest ratio of U.S. deaths to participants of any U.S. war (125 deaths per 1,000 participants, as compared to 65/1,000 during the Civil War). The war and occupation of Mexico City ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago, which brought 500,000 square miles under U.S. jurisdiction, second only to the Louisiana Purchase (828,000 square miles). Under the terms of the treaty, the U.S. paid $15 million for the lands (plus absorbed some U.S. citizen claims against Mexico). By 1848, Mexico had lost half of its territory to the U.S.
The war was fought by well-known U.S. military figures (e.g., Taylor, Scott, McClellan, Grant, Lee). The political background surrounding the war was intense, with much intrigue and backbiting. A major dividing line within the U.S. was between the anti-war Whigs and those who saw the western expansion as part of this country’s manifest destiny. The deeper division was between the pro- and anti-slavery factions within the country and the issue of whether the newly acquired lands would be slave free.
Grant, who thought the U.S. was wrong in militarily taking lands from Mexico, wrote in his memoirs that the Civil War was the result of the U.S.’s “unholy war” against Mexico. Polk, the central figure in this story, pushed his agenda secretly and did not shy away from using a variety of falsehoods to, in the author’s words, justify “the nation’s first offensive war.”
Whether one agrees with what he did, Polk was a figure of consequence. Without Polk, the size and power of the U.S. would be significantly less than it is today, but the land from Mexico came from the U.S.'s “might is right” approach. Polk died of cholera a few months after leaving office at the age of 53.
The book fills a dark spot in our country’s history.
Polk was Jeffersonian in policy (land for the yeoman farmers to counter the eastern establishment) and Jacksonian in approach (rules, honesty and fair play were secondary to accomplishing an objective). By the end of his term, Polk had settled the Oregon Territory issue with England (present-day BC border), Texas had become incorporated into the Union (with Rio Grande as its border), and upper California (current border with Baja California) and the New Mexico Territory (the aforementioned states) were obtained. Under Polk’s presidency, 1.2 million square miles of territory were brought under the administration of the U.S. The Department of Interior was created to administer these lands.
The land from Mexico was acquired through the U.S. military invasion that ended with the U.S. occupation of Mexico City. This military campaign, the author says, resulted in the highest ratio of U.S. deaths to participants of any U.S. war (125 deaths per 1,000 participants, as compared to 65/1,000 during the Civil War). The war and occupation of Mexico City ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago, which brought 500,000 square miles under U.S. jurisdiction, second only to the Louisiana Purchase (828,000 square miles). Under the terms of the treaty, the U.S. paid $15 million for the lands (plus absorbed some U.S. citizen claims against Mexico). By 1848, Mexico had lost half of its territory to the U.S.
The war was fought by well-known U.S. military figures (e.g., Taylor, Scott, McClellan, Grant, Lee). The political background surrounding the war was intense, with much intrigue and backbiting. A major dividing line within the U.S. was between the anti-war Whigs and those who saw the western expansion as part of this country’s manifest destiny. The deeper division was between the pro- and anti-slavery factions within the country and the issue of whether the newly acquired lands would be slave free.
Grant, who thought the U.S. was wrong in militarily taking lands from Mexico, wrote in his memoirs that the Civil War was the result of the U.S.’s “unholy war” against Mexico. Polk, the central figure in this story, pushed his agenda secretly and did not shy away from using a variety of falsehoods to, in the author’s words, justify “the nation’s first offensive war.”
Whether one agrees with what he did, Polk was a figure of consequence. Without Polk, the size and power of the U.S. would be significantly less than it is today, but the land from Mexico came from the U.S.'s “might is right” approach. Polk died of cholera a few months after leaving office at the age of 53.
The book fills a dark spot in our country’s history.
July 5, 2012
I became interested in The War of 1847 since I was a little boy, perhaps motivated by the nationalistic brainwashing during my elementary schooling days in Mexico. Now, I picked this book for entirely new reasons: while most people in Mexico are quick to remember what we lost – and most importantly, quick to attach fault to General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, very few people even bother to ask why. Most are unaware of the main reasons of the big defeat: an absence of national identity, a catastrophic deep political division, and very few Mexican states contributing men and money to the war effort. Let it be an example and a cautionary tale for future generations.
Wheelan started with a very long prologue describing the political environment of the US in the 1840’s. His description on President Polk’s policy and personality is very meticulous and at times it is a challenge for the reader to remain interested. The pace improves once he reaches the events in the Grande River, the start of hostilities, and the engagements in Palo Alto, Resaca de la Palma, Monterrey, La Angostura (or Buena Vista for the US side), the naval assault and landing in Veracruz (a bold movement, a prelude for Normandy 100 years latter), Cerro Gordo, and the desperate and last ditch efforts of the few, exhausted and poorly armed Mexican troops trying to stop the Americans at the gates of Mexico City.
I liked the book because it is an objective and very well informed historical recollection of the War. It explains the origins of victory and defeat, both in military and political terms, without nationalistic tones commonly found in Mexican authors.
Wheelan started with a very long prologue describing the political environment of the US in the 1840’s. His description on President Polk’s policy and personality is very meticulous and at times it is a challenge for the reader to remain interested. The pace improves once he reaches the events in the Grande River, the start of hostilities, and the engagements in Palo Alto, Resaca de la Palma, Monterrey, La Angostura (or Buena Vista for the US side), the naval assault and landing in Veracruz (a bold movement, a prelude for Normandy 100 years latter), Cerro Gordo, and the desperate and last ditch efforts of the few, exhausted and poorly armed Mexican troops trying to stop the Americans at the gates of Mexico City.
I liked the book because it is an objective and very well informed historical recollection of the War. It explains the origins of victory and defeat, both in military and political terms, without nationalistic tones commonly found in Mexican authors.
June 24, 2009
A very readable blow-by-blow account of U.S. political and military maneuverings during the war with Mexico. Although the book offers only sparing analysis of the events it portrays, the extensive research on display here should allow readers to form their own assessments of U.S. actions. Unfortunately, the book contains only limited information on Mexican perspectives, and several small errors creep in (the scholar Ramón Alcaraz, for instance, is repeatedly referred to as "Alcarez," while the town of Azcapotzalco is twice spelled "Azcapotzaleo"). More than anything else, I think this imbalance reflects the relative paucity of printed English-language sources on the Mexican side of the conflict. The references to Alcaraz as well as to a few other Mexican historians of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries indicate that Wheelan did attempt to seek out such material, but found little available compared to the wealth of accessible sources on the U.S. experience. While these gaps in the literature are being filled, though, Invading Mexico provides a useful and thorough overview of the means by which the United States rapidly seized massive amounts of its neighbor's territory, and became a continental power.
September 22, 2018
A decent overview of the Mexican War. Focuses primarily on the political side of the conflict, with the large minority of the book offered up to a only slightly detailed narrative of the various military operations.
While a good read, I would still recommend John Eisenhower's 'So Far From God' as the standard single volume work, still.
While a good read, I would still recommend John Eisenhower's 'So Far From God' as the standard single volume work, still.
December 25, 2024
Invading Mexico: America's Continental Dream and the Mexican War, 1846-1848 provides an incredible look at a conflict which netted the U.S. its largest amount of new territory since the Louisiana Purchase forty years before.
This war provides grist for a lot of supporting characters and subplots, and author Joseph Wheelan brilliantly exploits many of these as he tells the back story of a war that, even among its contemporaries, was quite a controversial event.
The story starts off with a tale of how Texas gained its independence from Mexico in 1836, and the book briskly fills readers in on the likes of the Alamo as well as Santa Anna and Sam Houston. This breakaway event set the predicate for the war between the U.S. and Mexico which took place a decade later.
The annexation of Texas by the U.S. in the closing hours of John Tyler's administration capped arguments among Whigs (largely opposed to this move out of concern it would expand slaveholding territory) and Democrats who by and large supported it for the same reason. The election of President James K. Polk, who had run on a platform of bringing both Texas and Oregon into the United States, all but assured that war with Mexico was in the offing. While war with England had also seemed a brief possibility over the Oregon Territory, this acquisition was pulled of peacefully owing to skilled U.S. statesmanship.
The leadup to the conflict with America's southern neighbor would erupt over disagreement over whether the Nueces or Rio Grande Rivers were the actual border between Texas and Mexico. Wheelan describes how the U.S. maneuvered the firing of the first shots on troops commanded by General Zachary Taylor in what was land beyond the Nueces River claimed by Mexico.
Readers expecting a glorious tale of U.S. triumph and justification of Manifest Destiny might be let down by this evenhanded accounting. They might also be surprised at how much time is spent discussing maneuverings in California and New Mexico (which at the time constituted several of what would become western U.S. states).
The situation in California during the war featured much of the same sort of confusion and ego trips that plagued the U.S. effort south of Texas. Much to the frustration of the Polk administration, mid-nineteenth century delays in communication across a vast continent plagued Washington D.C.'s attempts to smoothly run the war effort.
John C. Fremont "The Pathfinder", Pacific Squadron Commander Robert C. Stockton, and U.S. consul Thomas O. Larkin butted heads in trying to establish U.S. suzerainty in California. Fremont, who would be the first Republican nominee for president in 1856, would actually be court martialed over who precisely held military command in the California theater.
From a tactical point of view, many of the U.S. commanders would do an excellent job in securing victory after victory as the U.S. pushed southward. Many of the commanders on the ground would go on to become opponents of one another in the U.S. Civil war a decade and a half later.
The exploits of Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jackson, and George Meade (not all of whom, in their private writings, were fans of how and for what intentions this particular conflict was being waged) are written about in an at times exciting manner by Wheelan. There are admirably written accounts of various battles in this theaters-all of them U.S. victories- ranging from Monterrey to Buena Vista to Contreras and Chapultepec.
But the friction in the Bear Flag Republic paled in comparison to Generals "Fuss and Feathers" Winfield Scott and Zachary "Rough and Ready" Taylor's bickering during their times leading the U.S. Army fighting south of Texas. President Polk frequently felt that he was being shown up by Taylor, who was rumored to be angling for a presidential run 1848.
Taylor often felt Polk was undermining him due to these suspicions, while Scott-wh0 managed to pull off a huge amphibious landing in Vera Cruz-was often prickly when he felt he was not receiving enough accolades of his own.
At times, Scott almost came across as a proto, nineteenth century version of Douglas Macarthur. He had Whig presidential ambitions of his own, which caused friction between both him and Taylor as well as between both himself and Polk.
Added to the intrigue was the presence of Nicholas Trist, a diplomat sent to Mexico City by Polk who had to call audibles when he felt the delay between himself and D.C. was too lengthy for on-the-spot decision making. Polk himself had his own healthy amount of intrigue, not the least of which occurred when he covertly aided Santa Anna in escaping from exile in Cuba back to Mexico where, it was hoped in vain, his repatriation would help usher in a negotiated end to the war.
Wheelan talks a good bit about the San Patricio Battalion, a portion of the Mexican armed forces largely made up of American Irish immigrants who had defected over disaffection with what they viewed as an immoral war of aggression. They were not the only Americans unhappy with the war; the book looks at objections ranging from those expressed by Congressmen John Quincy Adams and Abraham Lincoln even to Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau.
The leadership and ultimate defeat of Mexican Generals Pedro de Ampudia and Mariano Aristra also comes in for analysis, as does the war's endgame when the U.S. faced the early stages of a revolt after Winfield Scott conquered Mexico City. Considering this war is a topic not often written about in detail by U.S. historians, the breadth brought to the subject by Wheelan is certainly deserving of commendation.
It would be challenging to find a better accounting of this conflict than Invading Mexico: America's Continental Dream and the Mexican War, 1846-1848.
This work provides a well-rounded look at a conflict which ended in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and America attaining territory from what would become the states of New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California and even a portion of Colorado.
There is a lot of political drama thanks to the personalities of Polk, Taylor, Scott, and Fremont. Readers will at times cringe at how these moving parts often impeded military progress, but they will also be surprised to learn that this war ended with the U.S. military not losing a single engagement of consequence.
This book also deserves credit for not overlooking just how controversial the origins of this war were and at some of the ethically questionable tactics employed by the Texas Rangers, which were led during the war primarily by John Jack "Coffee" Hays.
Wheelan truly set out to give a balanced look at this often (in the U.S) overlooked war which had crucial repercussions for both continental expansion and the sectionalist balanced of the antebellum years.
-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado
This war provides grist for a lot of supporting characters and subplots, and author Joseph Wheelan brilliantly exploits many of these as he tells the back story of a war that, even among its contemporaries, was quite a controversial event.
The story starts off with a tale of how Texas gained its independence from Mexico in 1836, and the book briskly fills readers in on the likes of the Alamo as well as Santa Anna and Sam Houston. This breakaway event set the predicate for the war between the U.S. and Mexico which took place a decade later.
The annexation of Texas by the U.S. in the closing hours of John Tyler's administration capped arguments among Whigs (largely opposed to this move out of concern it would expand slaveholding territory) and Democrats who by and large supported it for the same reason. The election of President James K. Polk, who had run on a platform of bringing both Texas and Oregon into the United States, all but assured that war with Mexico was in the offing. While war with England had also seemed a brief possibility over the Oregon Territory, this acquisition was pulled of peacefully owing to skilled U.S. statesmanship.
The leadup to the conflict with America's southern neighbor would erupt over disagreement over whether the Nueces or Rio Grande Rivers were the actual border between Texas and Mexico. Wheelan describes how the U.S. maneuvered the firing of the first shots on troops commanded by General Zachary Taylor in what was land beyond the Nueces River claimed by Mexico.
Readers expecting a glorious tale of U.S. triumph and justification of Manifest Destiny might be let down by this evenhanded accounting. They might also be surprised at how much time is spent discussing maneuverings in California and New Mexico (which at the time constituted several of what would become western U.S. states).
The situation in California during the war featured much of the same sort of confusion and ego trips that plagued the U.S. effort south of Texas. Much to the frustration of the Polk administration, mid-nineteenth century delays in communication across a vast continent plagued Washington D.C.'s attempts to smoothly run the war effort.
John C. Fremont "The Pathfinder", Pacific Squadron Commander Robert C. Stockton, and U.S. consul Thomas O. Larkin butted heads in trying to establish U.S. suzerainty in California. Fremont, who would be the first Republican nominee for president in 1856, would actually be court martialed over who precisely held military command in the California theater.
From a tactical point of view, many of the U.S. commanders would do an excellent job in securing victory after victory as the U.S. pushed southward. Many of the commanders on the ground would go on to become opponents of one another in the U.S. Civil war a decade and a half later.
The exploits of Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jackson, and George Meade (not all of whom, in their private writings, were fans of how and for what intentions this particular conflict was being waged) are written about in an at times exciting manner by Wheelan. There are admirably written accounts of various battles in this theaters-all of them U.S. victories- ranging from Monterrey to Buena Vista to Contreras and Chapultepec.
But the friction in the Bear Flag Republic paled in comparison to Generals "Fuss and Feathers" Winfield Scott and Zachary "Rough and Ready" Taylor's bickering during their times leading the U.S. Army fighting south of Texas. President Polk frequently felt that he was being shown up by Taylor, who was rumored to be angling for a presidential run 1848.
Taylor often felt Polk was undermining him due to these suspicions, while Scott-wh0 managed to pull off a huge amphibious landing in Vera Cruz-was often prickly when he felt he was not receiving enough accolades of his own.
At times, Scott almost came across as a proto, nineteenth century version of Douglas Macarthur. He had Whig presidential ambitions of his own, which caused friction between both him and Taylor as well as between both himself and Polk.
Added to the intrigue was the presence of Nicholas Trist, a diplomat sent to Mexico City by Polk who had to call audibles when he felt the delay between himself and D.C. was too lengthy for on-the-spot decision making. Polk himself had his own healthy amount of intrigue, not the least of which occurred when he covertly aided Santa Anna in escaping from exile in Cuba back to Mexico where, it was hoped in vain, his repatriation would help usher in a negotiated end to the war.
Wheelan talks a good bit about the San Patricio Battalion, a portion of the Mexican armed forces largely made up of American Irish immigrants who had defected over disaffection with what they viewed as an immoral war of aggression. They were not the only Americans unhappy with the war; the book looks at objections ranging from those expressed by Congressmen John Quincy Adams and Abraham Lincoln even to Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau.
The leadership and ultimate defeat of Mexican Generals Pedro de Ampudia and Mariano Aristra also comes in for analysis, as does the war's endgame when the U.S. faced the early stages of a revolt after Winfield Scott conquered Mexico City. Considering this war is a topic not often written about in detail by U.S. historians, the breadth brought to the subject by Wheelan is certainly deserving of commendation.
It would be challenging to find a better accounting of this conflict than Invading Mexico: America's Continental Dream and the Mexican War, 1846-1848.
This work provides a well-rounded look at a conflict which ended in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and America attaining territory from what would become the states of New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California and even a portion of Colorado.
There is a lot of political drama thanks to the personalities of Polk, Taylor, Scott, and Fremont. Readers will at times cringe at how these moving parts often impeded military progress, but they will also be surprised to learn that this war ended with the U.S. military not losing a single engagement of consequence.
This book also deserves credit for not overlooking just how controversial the origins of this war were and at some of the ethically questionable tactics employed by the Texas Rangers, which were led during the war primarily by John Jack "Coffee" Hays.
Wheelan truly set out to give a balanced look at this often (in the U.S) overlooked war which had crucial repercussions for both continental expansion and the sectionalist balanced of the antebellum years.
-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado
October 4, 2014
Exellent! Easy to read.
The maps could have been more and better.
The maps could have been more and better.
April 29, 2013
A very readable, entertaining and informative book about the Mexican War covering activities in Texas and Northern Mexico, California, New Mexico and Vera Cruz / Mexico City. I believe that the depiction of the leading Generals, junior officers (many of whom became major players in the Civil War) and Washington politicians was very accurate. Wheelan clearly points out both the good and the bad side of the story. I particularly enjoy Wheelan's writing style in telling the story in snippets and short narratives ranging in length from a paragraph to one or two pages. I would highly recommend the book.
March 8, 2016
Interesting and very readable, Invading Mexico does a good job of describing the events of a war that is often forgotten despite its importance. As a Californian, the war is a strong part of local history but you'd be hard pressed to find someone with more than a passing familiarity with it.
The book also serves as an "origin story" for many of the biggest names in the Civil War. It is particularly interesting to read about them, all fighting on the same side, and knowing that within 10 years they will be at each other's throats.
The book also serves as an "origin story" for many of the biggest names in the Civil War. It is particularly interesting to read about them, all fighting on the same side, and knowing that within 10 years they will be at each other's throats.
May 7, 2016
I wanted to like this one. I had hoped to learn about a piece of American history that gets glossed over or completely skipped on the way to the Civil War. But I was disappointed. The book was confusing and disjointed, and I had trouble keeping all the people straight. There was too much emphasis on unnecessary details (like how many cannons each army had) and there was a shocking lack of maps! The author also didn't seem to make any attempt to understand the Mexican point of view.
September 29, 2009
The book ends with a memorable sentiment from U. Grant, who was a young man at the time. The quote is too powerful to save, and, if it will entice anyone into learning more about this war, it is worth spoiling. Grant, as the book quotes from his memoir, says, the civil war was divine retribution for an unjust conflict, waged on an innocent people, solely for land.
July 4, 2015
An exceptional expose into the causes, decisions, divisions, and ultimate outcome of an American war rarely discussed. Joseph Wheeler writes in terms that will captivate the imagination of an era in which American Manifest Destiny was brought to fruition. An excellent read for all who want to enhance their knowledge of American military and political matters.
August 14, 2012
I knew very little about the Mexican War before reading this book. I was surprised how very books there were out on this subject.
March 22, 2016
Excellent book, great intro to a subject that all Americans needs to understand better.
The parallels between the US-Mexican war and Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are undeniable.
The parallels between the US-Mexican war and Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are undeniable.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews