Churchill's words; "never was so much owed by so many to so few;" came to encapsulate how; in a few critical months; the entire fate of the British Empire; if not the war; hung in the balance; to be determined not by world leaders or armies of millions; but by a handful of pilots fighting tirelessly in the skies over Britain.Tony Holmes describes the key conflict of the Battle of Britain; the clash between the Spitfire and the Bf 109 - detailing not only the key elements of both aircraft types - the airframe; engine; armament and flying characteristics; but also the pilots' training and both British and German tactics. The growing influence of radar and the efforts of British coastal defences are also examined; as are real-life engagements - from both German and British perspectives. With a wealth of previously unpublished material including first-hand accounts from the veterans who strapped themselves into these now legendary machines as well as lavish illustrations and cockpit-view artwork; this book puts the reader in the midst of a dogfight. This is a unique insight into one of the greatest duels of history in the world's first major aerial battle.
#1141233 in Books 2009-08-07 2009-08-07Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.20 x .72 x 6.07l; .90 #File Name: 1844673855234 pages
Review
5 of 8 people found the following review helpful. A truly insightful collection of essaysBy Tron HontoThis short book is incredibly over-priced and demonstrates that its so-called Marxist publishers are in practice no different from the 'blood-sucking' capitalists that they supposedly despise. How unfortunate it really is that this blemish taints an otherwise excellent collection of essays. This books is a mere 145pp. The previous reviewer inaccurately stated that the author's intention was to prove that there is no such thing as Islam but only Islams; which is a bad reading in my opinion. The presupposition is there; nonetheless; and al-Azmeh obviously considers speaking of Islam outside a specific spatio-temporal context a fruitless enterprise outside the context of theology; which is a reasonable observation. The danger; he asserts; is that in the context of history and social sciences speaking of "Islam" as a category is frustrated by its generic and protean nature that; in turn; subjects it unfairly to the use and abuse of the bias of those who wield it. I have personally seen al-Azmeh lecture at the American University in Cairo and I must admit that I was thoroughly impressed by his eloquence and scholarship. While it must be admitted that the language of this book is opaque at times; his style is nonetheless (I find) not too difficult to become comfortable and given a little patience even appreciated. Overall; I found this book to contribute incredible insights into how one should approach Islam in light of modernity and the current state of the world. Indeed; I found this work much more immediately relevant to the field of Islamic studies of the modern Muslim World than Fazlur Rahman's ISLAM MODERNITY.3 of 7 people found the following review helpful. Something for everyoneBy A CustomerI picked up this book immediately after September 11. I haven't read a lot about Islam. I understand that most Muslims are actually MORE fundamentalist than Jerry Falwell.Al-Azmeh explains Islam in a way that most Westerners will not be threatened by. And he makes no effort to apolgize for its fundamentalist incarnation. He has two recommendations for Muslims: (a) accept that the world really is secular/Christian; (b) don't bother with a literal interpretation of the Qur'an. He also points out that certain famous Western intellectuals liked aspects of Islam (Kant; Goethe).If you have foresight enough to want to see everyone get along; you can't do better than starting with this book.5 of 23 people found the following review helpful. Re-branded Orientalist cliches for ex-marxists and liberalsBy A CustomerThis rather disparate and dis-appointing collection of essay. The author's main contention is to demonstate that there is no Islam only islams... the demonstration is done by asseration rather than argument. The author seems to think that an opaque writing style will compensate for the analytical rigour the book so clearly lacks. Thus we have a strange brew- an attempted deconstruction of Islamism in the name of an essentialized universalism. Critique of Islamism for its essentialism becomes nothing more than a rhetorical act rather a theoritical position.
