Touched with Fire: The Land War in the South Pacific Reviews

• Superb Coverage of Pacific Campaign in WWII!

  
  By ALR35EFI69S5R on 2000-08-03
  The superb account rendered so graphically in this book educates a new generation of readers as to the horrific practical realities involved in the Allied island-hopping strategy employed by the Allies in waging the Pacific campaign during World War Two. Indeed, while the specific individual battles often involved far fewer ground troops and were much smaller in scale than what occurred in the European theater of the war, the ferocity of the opposition and the relative number of casualties were staggering. Thus Eric Bergerud's gripping recounting of the incredible details involved with the war in the South Pacific in "Touched With Fire: The Land War In The South Pacific" reminds us of the terrible costs associated with that campaign.

  This was truly a campaign requiring a total re-education of the American military involved. Starting with the disastrous lessons of the quite different realities of jungle warfare first experienced on Guadalcanal, the Allied command had to learn to adapt to the extremely tenacious, ingenious, and almost indefatigable efforts of the island's Japanese defenders, who could subsist on a little water and rice and move through the jungles with much great ease and skill than could we. No one was prepared for the sustained levels of ferocity with which the Japanese fought, usually to the death, over these small atolls that they had to recognize they could not hold onto forever. Yet they fought on.

  The book recounts the many ways in which the war in the Pacific was different from that waged in Europe, and is organized around several themes such as terrain, climate, diseases such as dysentery, etc. in illustrating how the very different negative circumstances surrounding the island hopping strategy affected and constrained our ability (as well as those of the Japanese) to fight effectively in such an environment. Of course, as the author maintains, the Allies learned very quickly; they needed to in order to survive. As so well described in Ronald Spector's "Eagle Against The Sun", the Japanese were incredibly ingenious in devising ways to use topography, indigenous materials, and a willingness to "`rough-it" to build virtually impregnable walls of resistance to the oncoming invaders.

  This is a very well written, passionately argued, and absolutely entertaining book to read. The author has done a remarkable job in documenting and substantiating his notions and theories, and I found myself surprised at how well some of his more provocative and controversial ideas are supported by the data he employs. This is an eminently worthwhile book, a wonderful addition to the growing library of titles exploring the realities of the war in the Pacific, and one I would recommend to anyone interested in learning more about the gritty details of the Allied `island to island' war against the Japanese. Enjoy!
  
  

• Splendid coverage with a few too many details for many.

  
  By on 1999-04-17
  Many people reading this review are well read concerning the European theatre and shockingly ignorant about the Pacific. I was also, until now. While Bergerud's style is not nearly as gripping as other recently popular authors on WWII his complete coverage of the savagery and confusion in the Solomons and New Guinea will grab even the hardest East Front grognard. The author gives extensive coverage of the armies, the weapons, and the brutal terrain that defined the war in the South Pacific. My only complaint about the work is its somewhat overly detailed description of the force structures and island geography that may distract the casual reader at times. Bergerud gives the Australian forces much deserved respect and completely immerses the reader in the horror that was Jungle warfare in WWII. His books about Vietnam have given him extra insight into the jungle warfare that is still so foreign to the American military. The book focuses completely on the South Pacific and does not cover the mid-Pacific campaign (Siapan, Guam, Iwo Jima, etc.) and this is also a strong point. I strongly recommend this book as an introduction to the land war in the Pacific in WWII. All European theatre fans should read it.
  
  

• A very good soldiers history

  
  By A3C1VFCKWJE3S9 on 2002-03-28
  Eric Bergerud has produced a very good soldier's history of the land war in the South Pacific. For Americans, this is a sadly understudied period, often ignored in favor of the far larger battles on the Central Pacific Islands or the Philippines. However, it was during this period that the outcome of the war in the Pacific was actually in doubt, and therefore where the Japanese were on a relatively equal footing with the Allies. The relative forces involved make the American involvement certainly equal to the parallel operations in North Africa and Sicily, but at that time we were far from being even equal partners with the British. It is a fascinating campaign in an exotic region, and Bergerud treats it as such.

  Bergerud takes a Keeganesque approach, but balances it with the necessity of his narrative. Those looking for an in-depth strategical analysis should look elsewhere - jungle wars are by necessity not wars of large manuver units. It is, by necessity, a grunt's story. However, Bergerud's narrative does describe the campaign and some of the higher strategic considerations which led to those grunts being sent to wherever they were sent, and why their respective armies sent them out to fight the way that they did. The narrative takes the reader on a fascinating journey through life as a combat solider in the South Pacific: where he fought, how he was wounded, injured or rendered ill (disease being a huge problem in the jungles of the South Pacific), how he was cared for in injury and death, what he ate, how he was armed, why he fought, and all the other elements that you need to really understand what a rifleman's life was like. The author makes good use of veterans' interviews in illustrating his points.

  Australians will take comfort (and hopefully Americans will learn something) in the attention paid to their contribution in the South Pacific. The MacArthur propaganda legacy does not hold sway over this book.

  If there is any great failing in this book, it is the lack of material present about the Japanese. At times, coverage of the Japanese is excellent. However, at no time does the author use as much interview material from Japanese veterans as he does from Allied vets. Also, Bergerud gives Japanese morale the short end of the stick. That is a serious flaw, given that by the time one reaches the chapter on morale, a reader should be painfully aware of just how much every Japanese attack in the South Pacific (even the successful ones) resembled massacres. What motivated these men to go and die in droves is a subject worthy of a serious examination, and Bergerud does not give it one.

  That aside, this is a great book for anyone wanting to bone up on the South Pacific campaign!
  
  

• A different kind of military history

  
  By ANQW5H8ZCG5LZ on 2005-04-13
  I previously believed that military history is primarily composed of the battles, the strategies used in the battles, & the leaders of the troops, with stories about individual soldiers mixed in to promote a better sense of understanding about the battle or war.
  
  After reading Eric Bergerud's book Touched With Fire, I now must add another component to that definition of military history - the theatre in which the battle or war was fought. People think of the European Theatre in World War II, they think of the Pacific Theatre, and they think of the war in the North Atlantic. This book really expands on the geographical influence of the fighting in the south pacific, especially the islands of New Guinea & the Solomans.
  
  Bergerud presents a compelling argument that the battles fought by soldiers, the tactics used by generals, and the way men lead their troops in battle is greatly affected, if not primarily driven by, the environment. Bergerud explains that the soldiers fighting in the South Pacific encountered a whole different war than those soldiers fighting in Europe, and not just because the enemy was Japanese rather than German or Italian. Bergerud maintains that the jungle was more of an enemy at times than the human opponent ever could have been. He also develops the theory that the jungle was one of the strongest allies that a fighting man could have, since it would shield him from the enemy or provide him with the necessary cover to launch a surprise attack, as the Japanese often did when fighting in the South Pacific.
  
  Bergerud focuses primarily on the terrain and how it shaped the war in this book, although he does intermix (quite nicely, in fact), stories from the soldiers about their experiences and some, although limited, tactical information about the battles.
  
  I would highly recommend this book to anyone that wants to understand why climate and geography play such a huge role in warfare. I would also highly recommend this book to anyone who is looking to understand the tremendous differences in the land war in the South Pacific versus the land war in Europe or the Middle East. Overall, it is a very good book, and one well worthy of reading by any student of military history or just someone curious about the Pacific theatre in World War II.
  
  

• Jungle hell

  
  By A3JD07VHDLT5FF on 2006-04-25
  The first jungle war was not Vietnam. It was in the hellish jungles of New Guinea and the Solomons. Apart from the well-known fighting at Gualdacanal, this camapign is quite unknown. Well, gruesome hand-to-hand combat between filthy, diseased, and starving footsoldiers is admittedly less romantic than steel aircraft carriers steaming in wast lotillas on a dark blue ocean, releasing deadly fighters into the sky.
  It was here, though, in the, decidedly unromantic, jungles of New Guinea and the Solomons that the back of of the Japanese army was broken. Thus enabling the victories in the north pacific.
  The author quite fairly describes the strenghts and weaknesses of the participating forces. It was not really inferior equipment, poor tactics, or poor soldiering that led to the Japanese defeat; it was faulty straegic planning and an unflexible doctrine.
  I give a kudos to the author for giving the Australian and Commonwealth troops their due, and comparing them favourably even to the US marines!
  One could say that the British Empire did serve a purpose here, since it meant that countries like Australia, India, New Zeeland, Fiji, etc., were already mobilised, and had, in some cases, gained valuable combat experience before the Japanese attack.
  I think that the relative lack of maps and illustration makes the book a little bit difficult to follow sometimes, and the narrative, while excellent, suffers from the somewhat disjointed structure of the book.
  
  
• Interesting read
  By A22FG01SSUWULP on 2005-03-22
  This is probably the best history I've read about fighting in that area. Bergerud says of General MacArthur that he was a "flawed personality but a magnificent general." Bergerud writes that he was always very careful with the lives of his men. MacArthur fought the U.S. Navy and powers in Washington who wanted to go slam -bang into every Jap base in the South Pacific and hang the cost in American lives.
  MacArthur preferred to go right by them whenever possible and leave them marooned. When the war ended over 250,000 Japanese troops were sitting looking at the sky and ocean, armed to the teeth but with no one to fight. It is important to remember that much of the criticism of MacArthur came from those who told us Mao was an "agrarian reformer" and were also hopeful a defeated Japan would fall behind the Iron Curtain. MacArthur prevented that.
  
  
• The Best WW2 Book I Read Last Year
  By A801J9MEI0BYG on 1999-12-17
  Eric Bergerud has written a superb study of the conditions under which American and Australian troops fought against the Japanese in the Pacific from 1942-45. I've recommended it to several friends with an interest in the history of World War Two, and they were every bit as impressed as I was. A fantastic book.
  
  
• A Masterpiece
  By on 1998-11-02
  Even if you could care less about WWII, military history, or history in general, read this book. Bergerud gives an accurate, if bare-bones, account of the grander strategic scale on which the war in the South Pacific was fought, and then precedes to the real meat of the text: a series of chapters covering the conditions in which the infantry actually fought. The book's greatest strength is the massive amounts of material that the author has gleaned from the actual veterans of the conflict, and surely in the future historians who are trying to reconstruct what actually happened on the ground in WWII will be truly grateful for this kind of research. The stories of the men who actually served in the South Pacific give the war a more human character than it could ever have without these accounts. The war is presented to the reader in all of its splender and horror and even on many occasions its comedy. If you liked the style of Stephen Ambrose's Citizen Soldiers, Bergerud does it even better. Indeed, it is a shame that Bergerud's book hasn't achieved the same kind of recognization as has Ambrose's work. He lets these veterans speak for themselves, and it is these accounts that truly make this book great.
  
  
• An Eye Opener
  By A1OV5VL20B030G on 2003-03-13
  Like many Americans, my view of land combat against Japan was heavily influenced by books and movies that focused on the island hopping campaign highlighted by Tarawa, Peleliu, Iwo Jima and Okinawa. While aware of Guadalcanal, I was less familiar with the fight for New Guinea and its strategic importance.
  This book does an excellent job of introducing the reader to the nightmarish conditions found in New Guinea and of linking the battles there to the ones fought at the same time on Guadalcanal. It does not get bogged down in the military minutia of unit designations. Instead it concentrates on the impressions of individual soldiers while they struggle to achieve "big picture" objectives that were as imperceptible to them as the jungle landscape they were fighting for.
  I highly recommend it to anyone interested in getting a feel for these under publicized but crucial battles in the South Pacific.
  
  
• A different way of writing military history
  By on 2004-02-16
  I have read many stories of World War II, but this one treats things differently. Instead of book with a story that starts at the beginning and ends at the end of the campaign, this book condenses the "story" into a single 38-page chapter.

  The remaining almost 500 pages deal with different aspects of the entire campaign. It includes sections on the terrain (almost all jungle), the armies, the tactics, and many other features of the South Pacific war. There are many reminiscences from those who fought, and occasionally a story of a specific campaign.

  What this does is give you a far better picture than most books of what it was like to be there. Instead of talking about the "harsh" jungle or the "relentless" Japanese, you get a huge detailed picture of exactly what it was like - the smell of the jungle, and the tactics the Japanese used.

  Interspersed with this are Bergerud's comments on the effectiveness of how each company waged war, the strengths of the weapons, and how unprepared all sides were for the terrain.

  I finished this book with a far deeper understanding of these battles, and I'd be interested to see this approach applied to other military history books.
  
  

• An exceptional survey of World War II in the South Pacific
  By on 1999-10-13
  As a former military officer and the son of one of the World War II Marine veterans Eric Bergerud pays tribute to in this book, this was a "must-read" book for me, and I've now read it three times cover-to-cover and have shared it with a growing group of my friends and family. Bergerud's writing style reminds me of John Keegan's in "The Face of Battle"--full of details, but tight,logical and crisp--and he gives a "face" to combat in the Pacific. He lets the veterans speak for themselves, and they do so eloquently. While it's full of detail enough for a fanatical military buff or historian, the book reads well enough to be appreciated by general readers, too, and more of today's citizens should read this: we forget our veterans' sacrifices all too easily. My entire family read it, and I think we finally got a better appreciation of what is was that our dad went through as a teenager over 50 years ago. This book really brings the hell of the Pacific war home.
  
  
• It's Good But Not Great
  By on 2001-02-05
  Touched With Fire is a book that overviews and analyzes the war that the Allies fought against Japan in the South Pacific. Unlike many books on the Pacific theatre which focus on one battle or campaign,Touched With Fire provides information on the many different aspects of the war in the south pacific including things such as the terrain,the native population,morale,the commanders,and the weapons used by both sides.The author also ties in interviews with veterans of the conflict into the various subjects that the author discusses.This book also tells how the Allies were able to win the battles against the Japanese without making the Allies seem like supermen or the Japanese as vastly inferior.The strengths and weaknesses of both sides are also discussed and unlike many books,this one avoids either totally trashing the Japanese or overly praising them.The book also throws out the steriotype that the Japanese were expert jungle fighters and that the Allies were poor at jungle combat.In reality the Japanese had just as much trouble with the devilish terrain as the Allies did.The book also gives credit to the U.S. Army and the Autralians which is a welcome change from the piles of Marine praising literature which are written.However I have some problems with this book.The author states that there were no tank on tank confrontations in the South Pacific.He also says that the Japanese employed tanks only twice in the south pacific.At Guadalcanal and Milne Bay. However Japanese tanks were in fact deployed three times in the south pacific.Besides Guadalcanal and Milne Bay they also had tanks at Biak.During the American takeover of Biak there was a tank on tank battle between the Japanese Ha-Go Type 95 Light Tanks and the American Sherman Tanks. The Japanese lost. The author also seems to be a fan of General Macaurther. For example he calls Macaurther's conduct of the defense of the Philippines as brilliant and he states that Macaurther's forces in the Philippines were outnumbered.Contrary to that Macaurther's poorly trained and unprepared troops numbered over 100,000. The total number of invading Japanese troops never exceeded 60,000. But despite the fact that there is a hint of bias and a few innaccuracies,Touched With Fire is a good book that I would recommend to anyone interested in the Pacific war.
  
  
• The hows and the whys
  By on 2002-01-03
  The sixth division attack the 4th divisions right flank and met heavy resistance but the heroic sixth broke throught bla bla bla bla bla. I was getting pretty tired of this kind of history so Im glad somebody finally wrote about the men who fought, why they fought, how they fought and the [stuff]they had to put up with while they were there . If yer interested in the the men who fought the weapons they used and the conditions they fought in amoung other things, this book is for you. The movement of armies , the politics,and the generals with their inflated egos are left out, FINALLY. Bergerud does a good job trying to bring those intangibles left out of official histories into light. an excellent read
  
  
• Fanaticism in the Pacific
  By on 1997-12-01
  This book covers in detail the course of the war between Guadacanal and Tarawa; strictly an analysis of combat techniques in the jungle environment. The Australian forces are given a rare forum to explain their contribution to the Pacific conflict; deservedly characterized by the author as "the best land army of the war". It was the AIF that patented guerrilla warfare, before the American material tsunami, in its most brutal, savage, and murderous aspect. Perhaps it is only the ANZAC's that had the most to loose in a Japanese victory. They clearly fought on the personal and intimate basis of hatred and survival.

  This is a rare '90's book that clearly focuses on the Japanese military as a demonic cult of death. That military managed an engine of war that would not accept conditional defeat, and insured the unnecessary deaths of millions of people. Battle histories are usually one-sided efforts because the loosing side is typically dead; in this conflict the Japanese military was exterminated in total by own their design. This book contains the recollections of dozens of combat veterans who quickly adapted to a new form of warfare in a punishing environment.

  Put this book up on your shelf next to your "The Pacific War" by J. Costello or close by W. Manchester's "Goodby Darkness".
  
  

• both pleasing and ultimately disappointing
  By on 2001-01-29
  After reading previous reviews of this book, I was disappointed. This work fills a needed gap for the general reader by helping bring to light the sacrifices of the anonymous men and units who fought the Japanese to a standstill, then rolled them back in the southwestern Pacific. Unfortunately, I feel that in the process it unfairly and unfortunately denigrates the contributions of other fighting forces in the war against Japan.

  Granted, most Americans have a concept of the war in the Pacific that is seriously flawed, and particularly in their views of the southwestern Pacific theatre. For most Americans, perceptions of the Solomons campaigns are colored by the extensive coverage - both contemporary and historical - of the role played by the 1st and elements of the 2nd Marine Division on Guadalcanal. In reality, the lion's share of the fighting in the Solomons, Bismarcks, and on New Guinea was borne by US Army and Commonwealth forces. This book in part redresses that imbalance, emphasizing the role played by the US Army and Australian forces (but somehow neglects the also highly regarded New Zealanders).

  Unfortunately, the treatment goes farther and unfairly villainizes most of the US Navy command structure that prosecuted the Central Pacific campaign. The author seems to have accepted the view, common in the early 1940s, that MacArthur was our greatest general and should have been in overall command in the Pacific for a slow and inexorable march through the Philippines and Formosa. In reality, MacArthur was a brilliant but fatally flawed general, as ably portrayed by William Manchester. The author of this work only briefly touches on some of the worst episodes while describing the fighting on northern New Guinea, when MacArthur was managing a massive and self-serving PR campaign, while exhorting his harried field generals with histrionic 'don't come back alive' speeches.

  In reality American plans for the war against Japan had always revolved around a central Pacific campaign, for very clear reasons. The southwestern Pacific (1) simply did not offer the port facilities necessary to prosecute what had to be a naval war, (2) would have meant that most campaigns would have been prosecuted in the face of Japanese land-based air (as in the Cape Gloucester campaign), and (3) would have been fought in enclosed, uncharted waters that would have helped nullify the American advantage in naval airpower. In short, the Central Pacific campaign was savage and bloody, but necessary.

  Also, no account is taken of the fact that by forcing Japan into what amounted to a two-front war (not counting the CBI and Chinese theatres, which are still sorely neglected by writers), the Americans ably used their overwhelming advantage in physical resources to nullify the apparent Japanese advantage of interior lines. The Japanese were like an outclassed boxer, continually staggered by alternating left-right punches.

  Even Halsey, MacArthur's favorite admiral, suffers. He is castigated for the unnecessarily bloody and protracted New Georgia campaign. The real problem on New Georgia was not the Japanese so much as the long approach march - twenty miles through some of the most horrible terrain on earth. US Army leaders had bought into a 'strategy of the indirect approach', and had originally planned to land over eighty miles away and march overland, through even worse terrain. Halsey intervened with a plan to land closer. The Army leadership absolutely would not take the ultimate step and launch a Marine Corps-style direct assault across the Roviana Lagoon against the main Japanese position at Buna (as the Japanese most feared they would). The rest is, unfortunately, history. Halsey, not the Army generals, was responsible for putting a stop to this creeping hemorrhage by bypassing Kolombangara to land on Vella Lavella, disjointing Japanese plams for another battle of attrition.

  There is no doubt that the Marine Corps cultivates publicity (for very good reasons, as outlined in Allan Millett's excellent organizational history of the Corps), and was particularly successful in publicizing their contributions to the Pacific war. Unfortunately the contributions of Allied forces in the southwestern Pacific were probably overshadowed more by their leader's ego (anonymous forces under Douglas MacArthur have inflicted another defeat on the Japanese, MacArthur has returned to the Philippines, et cetera) than by anything the Navy and Marines did.

  The historical fact is that the Army (MacArthur) competed with the Navy and Marine Corps (Nimitz), to the ultimate detriment of Japan. To rightly emphasize the contributions of the one, it is not necessary to minimize the other. This controversy had almost died a well-deserved death with the interservice rapprochement that followed the Gulf War, and it's a shame to see it resurrected.
  
  

• A decent overview of the initial stages...
  By A3HP76CJSBDHV0 on 2001-02-26
  Eric Bergerud has written a concise look at the initial stages of the Pacific campaign, and the Australian contribution is given as much print as the U.S., which is good, as I learned just how important their contribution was, as they certainly were skilled and disciplined fighters, and equal to any U.S. Marines in bravery and tenacity.

  This book never goes into any detail on any particualr battle of the years it covers, mainly 1942 to late '43, and the author had a tendency to want to skip from one subject to another, and just when my attention was captured completely, it was on to another facet of the jungle campaign. While certainly an informative read, this is not the front-line, from the soldiers eyes, type of book I had hoped for. Rather, it covers all details, from logistics, to how units were formed, to to how services interacted, to eventually how the fighting often got up close and personal, and it was the latter of these I had hoped the book would detail.

  A great read nonetheless, especially for information on the early stages of the Pacific war. If you want to know how these men overcame the truly frightening aspects of Pacific combat, with its malarial heat, lack of cover, inhumane conditions, sleep deprivation as the result of the Japanese emphasis on night infiltration, and the suicidal bravery of a cunning enemy, then read "With the Old Breed" by E.B. Sledge. THE book on Pacific combat.
  
  

• Info on Japan sadly lacking
  By A6PLJGHK0SV3Y on 2001-07-18
  Although this is a well-researched book it does not have any new or updated info on the Japanese Forces. The author makes the same mistake of most western authors: He repeats old information, and he makes quite a few mistakes. On page 14 he writes that "the cooperation between the 17th Army in Rabaul and the Imperial Combined Fleet in Truk was minimal" And so it should have been! The Imperial Army's 8th Area Army under the command of Gen. Imamura was responsible for that, not the 17th Army! Gen. Imamura met Adm. Yamamoto on several occasions! Then we have the "Japanese soldiers were shorter than their rifles with fixed bayonets". I know quite a few veterans and have hundreds of photos of Japanese soldiers. All of them are taller than their weapons! On page 285: " Expensive weapons such as tanks and heavy artillery were rare in the IJA" What can I say? Tanks were widely used and so was artillery. The Japanese tank forces have been underestimated for a long time and although tanks were built in much lower quantities and quality than say, in Germany, they did build more than the Italians. Japanese tank production was close to 8000, and at the end of the war they came out with the Type 3 tank, a very good weapon with a 75mm gun. Japan could never match Allied superiority in weapons, but they did the best they could with what they had. I wish more authors would read some of the newer books on WW2 published in Japan. The info and documented evidence contained therein would surprise quite a few people!
  
  
• A war of annihilation.....
  By A2TYPM9ZZVTCNL on 2006-11-08
  I purchased this book whilst living in the SE Asian tropics and it certainly provided a stark insight into the land battles of New Guinea and the Solomon Islands from mid-1942 until early 1944. Horrific. Australians interested in WW2 in this theatre should certainly pick up this book.
  
  Anyone interested in the historical aspects of these WW2 battles will find the descriptions and weighing up of the armies, the weapons they employed and the horrors of the battlefield they suffered & fought in, to be utterly fascinating.
  
  More so the interviews with surviving combatants are highly entertaining and this book serves as a worthy monument to their exploits in this green hell.
  
  In particular this provides for an insight the brutality of the campaigns covered. The conditions endured by citizen and professional soldiers, and the combat most foul, they engaged in is graphically described. Yet all this takes place in a naturally beautiful environment....
  The descriptions by veterans of hand-to-hand combat and degradation provides a stark view of some of the motivations and endurance of individuals under some of the most extreme combat conditions in WW2.
  
  Thoroughly worth reading.
  
  
  
• A superb book with one very irritating flaw
  By A1KL3T3OF54WFG on 2007-02-17
  If it were not for the one flaw mentioned in the title (and about which more below)this book would have received five stars.
  
  Campaign histories are often impersonal narratives that fail to capture either the strategic importance of events or the personal experiences of the combatants. Those books which do capture the experiences of the combatants are often naive when it comes to strategy. Touched with Fire describes the war in the South Pacific on all levels, personal, tactical, logistic and strategic. It is well written, insightful and easy to read.
  
  Bergerud makes the point that before the campaign in the South Pacific the Japanese were still on the offensive, even despite Midway. By the end of the campaign there was no doubt in any sane military man's mind that Japan would lose the war. Bergerud clearly explains why the Japanese decision to continue the war after their losses in the South Pacific was militarily insane, but also examines why unconditional victory over Japan was desirable and maybe even necessary (and how the same attitudes that made this so contributed to Japan's initial success and eventual failure).
  
  For an American author Bergerud treats the combatants very open handedly, praising the Japanese and Australians for their strengths and not shying away from problems with the US military.
  
  The fact that the author is an American leads me to the flaw in the book, something which might seem minor, but which was a constant source of irritation and grated so badly that it cost Bergerud two stars. The book is about events which happened entirely in the southern hemisphere. Therefore when I encountered references to events happening in summer of 1942 I asked myself, summer 1941/42 or summer 42/43? Luckily I knew enough about the dates involved to realise that it was neither. To my surprise and horror I realised that the author was referring to the northern hemisphere seasons when discussing events that happened in the southern hemisphere! The battles for Guadalcanal and the initial battles for New Guinea did not take place in summer, they were in winter (although traditional European seasons have little meaning in the tropics). I assume that the author knows that the seasons are reversed in the southern hemisphere. Therefore I can only conclude that he made a conscious decision to ignore this fact and to deliberately introduce errors into his work in order to make it more palateable to Americans. This betrays both a contempt for the intellect of his American readers and a contempt for his audience outside America. Neither is acceptable.
  
  It is a shame that such a good book is flawed in this way. This may seem a minor point, but anything which betrays such monumental contempt for the reader has a major negative effect on the enjoyment of a book. It would not take much to correct the references to the seasons or simply replace them with dates if it's perceived that the concept of a round earth is too complex for the target audience (yes I'm being facetious). It would be good if this could be done in any future editions of this otherwise excellent book.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Exellent report from the most horrible of battlegrounds
  By on 1999-10-11
  Excellent report from the most horrible and forbidding battle grounds of WWII. It explains what happens when placing untrained young troops in a totally alien environment, to which they are totally unprepared, but still prevailed. It also gave the AIF the credit that fine nation of warriors deserve but are never given, as the British take the "glory" for what the Aussies achieve. The author does seem to have it in for Adm. King and the Dept. of Navy in general. If one needs to learn what our troops were forced to endure during the Pacific struggle, this report is the next best thing to have been there. To the Americans and Australians who fought there, I say a very humble "Thank you"
  
  
• Excellent Soldier's-Eye View of South Pacific Ground Combat
  By AKYP06R981T5B on 2000-11-16
  This is an excellent book covering a limited area of ground combat, the jungles of the South Pacific. This is not just a story of the Aliies vs. Japan, it is very much a story of man vs. nature. The author gives the reader a glimpse of the difficulties all parties faced fighting in such adverse conditions. This book is not concerned as much in giving a detailed history of the campaign in the South Pacific, but concentrates on the human factor.

  Author Bergerud gives plenty of attention to this often overlooked area of combat, giving special attention to the horrific combat over the Kokoda Trail, a narrow track winding its way through the jungles and mountains of New Guinea. The Australian and Japanese troops fought through sweltering heat in the jungles, but also fought in conditions near freezing in the Owen Stanley Mountain Range.

  Although the author gives special attention to the usually ignored Australian contributions, he also closely examines American and Japanese experiences in the South Pacific. Combatants were often in wretched physical condition, due to the often overwhelming assault of tropical diseases and heat, which in turn contributed to mental breakdowns. The wrenching images of men who belong in hospitals serving as frontline soldiers will remain with the reader.

  "Touched by Fire" is not a great history of the South Pacific, but is instead a masterful telling of the experiences of the combatants who were involved in this grueling endurance match.
  
  

• Absolutely Outstanding!
  By ADTJK9OUDF7H0 on 2000-11-17
  Bergerud's book is packed with detailed and fascinating information which illustrates his point that war in the South Pacific was unusually brutal and harrowing. His unflinching moral condemnation of Japanese military tactics and planning is refreshing in a world of politically correct historical revisionists which wish to put the Allies on trial for fighting back against its aggressors. Bergerud explains how the Allies won the war and why the Japanese lost, without turning Allied soliders into cartoon heroes or the Japanese into cartoon villians. Additionally, he shows how, once the war moved into the Central Pacific and further west, it was already a lost cause for the Japanese, and the last few years of the war were mere pointless bloodletting. It's at once fascinating, sad, exciting and amazing that anyone survived that terrible horror.
  
  
• The premier account of World War II's South Pacific campaigns
  By A1WZB0QSK7CTF3 on 2006-03-02
  In a writing style often reminiscent of the works of John Keegan and the late Stephen Ambrose, Eric Bergerud provides a rich and gripping account of the land war faced by all sides--Japanese, Americans, Australians and New Zealanders--in the unimaginably grim conditions of the South Pacific from 1942 to 1944. Dr. Bergerud's text reinforces survivors' reports of the effects of terrain, disease and climate, which wrought in their own ways as much of an effect on the course of the entire South Pacific war as did the actual combat and military actions. His writing peels away much of the bare reporting found in the official campaign monographs and intersperses a keen analysis of all of the significant actions--Guadalcanal, New Georgia, Bougainville--with vivid first-person accounts from veterans of the campaigns. Bergerud's reporting of the New Georgia campaign is especially noteworthy, bringing this relatively little-known campaign in the Central Solomons into clearer focus but without stinting on acute criticisms of the U.S. military's conduct of an over-extended campaign that resulted in the accidental sinking of the naval task force's flagship by a PT boat; an overabundance of "friendly fire" victims; and the first official diagnoses of "combat neurosis" as a clinical psychological condition. In every respect, this is an excellent, highly readable and gripping account that does justice to a series of largely long-forgotten actions that helped determine the fate of the Pacific War, which successfully blends the clarity of the strategic and operational visions of these campaigns with the worm's-eye view of the average soldier or Marine of each of the combatants.
  
  
• Definitive history, including little-known land actions in the South Pacific
  By A3663ZOZSUWQFF on 2006-06-29
  Bergerud is magisterial in his approach, utilizing interviews with the participants and diaries as a principal tool for getting readers deep into the action. Highly recommended.
  
  
• Touched by Fire
  By A2O5BAG4OGLHWZ on 2006-07-15
  I bought this book, and the companion book, Fire in the Sky by the same author. I bought them becasue my father spent from May 1942 until near the end of the war in the South Pacific. These books are NOT cronological history books, but rather an IN DEPTH discussion of why the US won and why the Japanese lost. Most of the book is taken up with quotes from the veterans who fought the war. Fire in the Sky had a few pages of quote from one of my Dad's friends from the 17th Weather Squadron.
  
  
• Bergerud brings the South Pacific war home to US readers
  By on 1999-07-17
  Bergerud's book is a great summary of the south west pacific land war. It gives the view from all the main armies. He illustrates the soldiers' eye view of the war whilst explaining the big picture strategic importance of events. The campaigns in New Guinea and the Solomons were the end for the Japanese expansion. The Japanese relied on an overlapping network of air/sea power on their pacific perimeter rather than German style defence in depth. Once the allies broke the chain in the South-West their expansion was over. Bergerud to his credit details the pivotal role the Australian Army played in this, they carried the bulk of the front line fighting in the critical New Guinea campaign. I don't think this is realised in the US and certainly not in Hollywood!!
  
  
• It's the best WWII book I've read.
  By on 1999-07-11
  This is the best of the approximately 200 books on WWII that I've read.(I've read it twice) I didn't want to put it down. The author amazed me with the detailed descriptions of the hardships the troops endured.I certainly hope he writes more on the South Pacific conflict.Nobody has done it better.
  
  
• Detailed, but dis-jointed!
  By A1HJ3XWWGLSEUZ on 1999-06-28
  This book is detailed, well researched, nicely balanced between narrative & quotes. Indeed, it is a very full account of all the elements that went into producing the hell that was WW2 in the South Pacific. Problem to me was the decision to deal with these elements in a sort of dry, encyclopedic manner. The Author really covers everything, including artillery, drugs, hospital facilities, furlough, morale, religion, terrain, tobacco, transport, weapons, etc., etc., but deals with them as separate situations. This approach is extremely thorough. It also reveals the "blood & guts" horrors, & difficulties of combat in that theatre of war. Sadly, I feel it hinders the reader in following the actual progress & development of the campaign. The short "calander" of events at the end is no compensation. This book is fine for folk who know the history of the South Pacific Campaign & want to flesh out the details. Not too satisfactory for those readers starting at scratch!
  
  
• An excellent book
  By on 2000-08-04
  I got this book about two years ago, and since then I've read it several times. It is one of those books that just seems to reveal more and say different things each time, because it is so rich and detailed, full of so many things. I liked the "disjointedness" and the variety, because each aspect is tereated with depth and fullness. His description of the actual terrain of the South Pacific is amazing, the most realistic and vivid description of any "battlefield" I've ever read. His presentation of letters and accounts from the actual. participants is also amazing. He makes fantastic use of first-hand accounts. His description of the psychology of the war is unique and fascinating. This is a definate, must-read military history book.
  
  
• Good, but many of the details come up short.
  By A1R3WQGXR710EE on 2001-11-21
  This was the first detailed history book I have read on the land war in the South Pacific. I found it fairly easy to pick up even with little prior knowledge - just about the right level of detail for a novice.
  
  Howver, I was thoroughly disappointed with the section of the book on weaponry. This was the only subject matter the author touched upon on which I was already reasonably knowledgable, and it did not impress. This was alarming, because if many of the details on subjects I do know are wrong, I have every reason to suspect that the details on the subjects I didn't know are just as wrong.
  
  That entire section reads as if copied in bits and pieces from reference books. Such and such gun is so many inches long, with a barrel so many inches long, and a weight of however many pounds. Trivial and beside the point. More interesting would be how and why various weapons were tactically employed, and this information is sparse. That is occasionally touched upon in the verbatim interviews with veterans who served there, but where the author throws in explanations they are typically confused and unhelpful, if not outright false.
  
  For example, the Tommygun was an effective weapon because it [fired a solid lead bullet] "which had a thin zinc coating which dispersed by the time it left the barrel, leaving a lead round in flight."
  
  In another confusing section, it is stated that detachable barrels were desireable for a machinegun because "a worn barrel cost the weapon power and accuracy." Yes, but much more importantly (and not mentioned), a detachable barrel allowed the gunner to swap in a cold barrel and continue firing when the original was too hot.
  
  If you have already read any serious material on the South Pacific land war, you'll probably find most of the information presented here to be too shallow. However, a saving grace are the many verbatim quotes from interviews with the men who were actually there. 3.5 / 5.
  
  

• Fire In The Sky: The Air War In The South Pacific
• Eagle Against the Sun: The American War With Japan
• Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account of the Landmark Battle
• Closing With the Enemy: How GIs Fought the War in Europe, 1944-1945 (Modern War Studies)
• If You Survive: From Normandy to the Battle of the Bulge to the End of World War II, One American Officer's Riveting True Story