Patriots by James Wesley Rawles
1 - 20 of 80 Posts
Joined
·
4,591 Posts
I liked it, it was a decent read. The one thing that really got me about the book was the "good guys" had teflon luck. In a couple of the scenes these guys are driving a vehicle and shooting numerous bad guys and the bad guys standing still dont hit crap.
Joined
·
1,698 Posts
Scary. I actually agree with trixie on something.
:I also had a couple of problems with JWR's book. But I suppose if you accept it as a how-to guide couched in a poorly-written novel, then it's OK.
I found it overly religious and overly political, but there was nonetheless useful information contained in it. Kinda like this site.
Joined
·
1,855 Posts
It's only overdes(c)riptive to those that don't, or won't, take the time to research those things that they don't understand. Why wouldn't they?
Joined
·
8,012 Posts
if i say something is overly descriptive that means i dont understand it?
it was a good book, just not a great book. one second after was good-very good book. earth abides sucks.
i tried to listen to "left behind" audio book on a long drive, it was horrible. worthless.
wolf and iron is the worst book ever written, avoid it at all costs.
Joined
·
1,855 Posts
Interesting. I liked Patriots more than One Second After but, I'm not taking anything away from One Second After though. It was a good book.
Left Behind is difficult at best. Especially considering as a Christian I fundamentally disagree with pre-Tribulation rapture. The rest of the series is just trying to get somewhere so someone else can take care of them instead of them taking care of themselves. I agree with you about that.
I have not read Wolf and Iron and won't waste my time based on your assessment. Thanks.
Joined
·
4,071 Posts
Ok so I have a question for all of you I want to buy one of these books either "One Second After" or "Patriots", which in your opinion is the best for me. I want to at least get something out of it and tech stuff isn't too big over my head so which should it be.
Joined
·
69 Posts
I thought both books were good, but I didn't understand why "Patriots" had the chapter about the two brothers? It took away from the story and just didn't make a lot of sense to add it?
It seemed like he was discibing the two brothers who actually shot at the Ohio State Troopers a few years back? The shooting was caught on a dash camera so it has been shown over and over.
I liked that the books were not just drama but factually correct.
Just my 2 cents.
It seemed like he was discibing the two brothers who actually shot at the Ohio State Troopers a few years back? The shooting was caught on a dash camera so it has been shown over and over.
I liked that the books were not just drama but factually correct.
Just my 2 cents.
Joined
·
925 Posts
I guess if your a newbie and don't have a real group and the idea is new to you it could spur some thought.
But...........
The firearms and tactics info is pretty much 80's gun magazine "doctrine".
The idea that the "ultimate" group would set their retreat next to a public road and then hassle everyone on it as they try to pass just plain irritates me. I thought it mildly ironic when they send their party out and they get the **** shot out of them by folks doing the same thing. Very wrong on many levels, with that same self righteous attitude tainting many parts of the book for me.
The good news is that dog would only hunt between the pages of his book.
They only get attacked by bafoons which all get dispatched handily. In effect anyone with two brain cells, a tour or two in Afghanistan or Iraq and a ****y attitude would have cleaned their clock. All it would have taken was a "false" alarm or two to give away their reaction plan and then a real attack from concealment with scoped hunting rifles at the attackers leisure. Owned.
Anyone that thinks his simple minded approach to retreat defense is "realistic" needs to chat with someone whose been to war recently. Were me and mine screwed with like they seemed to believe was their right to do, they would never been able to go outside the house again.
Maybe it's the writing style, but the human interaction comes off as if they all belong to a cult. Maybe some folks have it in them, but I can't imagine anyone I know coming off like they do.
It's all just too campy for me to enjoy much.
High point's of the book IMO, "Mares Shank" and "For an Once Of Gold" are good chapters as are a couple others.
Bottom line.
I personally believe some of the silliness in Patriots is just down right dangerous should it be taken too seriously.
Take care,
Den
But...........
The firearms and tactics info is pretty much 80's gun magazine "doctrine".
The idea that the "ultimate" group would set their retreat next to a public road and then hassle everyone on it as they try to pass just plain irritates me. I thought it mildly ironic when they send their party out and they get the **** shot out of them by folks doing the same thing. Very wrong on many levels, with that same self righteous attitude tainting many parts of the book for me.
The good news is that dog would only hunt between the pages of his book.
They only get attacked by bafoons which all get dispatched handily. In effect anyone with two brain cells, a tour or two in Afghanistan or Iraq and a ****y attitude would have cleaned their clock. All it would have taken was a "false" alarm or two to give away their reaction plan and then a real attack from concealment with scoped hunting rifles at the attackers leisure. Owned.
Anyone that thinks his simple minded approach to retreat defense is "realistic" needs to chat with someone whose been to war recently. Were me and mine screwed with like they seemed to believe was their right to do, they would never been able to go outside the house again.
Maybe it's the writing style, but the human interaction comes off as if they all belong to a cult. Maybe some folks have it in them, but I can't imagine anyone I know coming off like they do.
It's all just too campy for me to enjoy much.
High point's of the book IMO, "Mares Shank" and "For an Once Of Gold" are good chapters as are a couple others.
Bottom line.
I personally believe some of the silliness in Patriots is just down right dangerous should it be taken too seriously.
Take care,
Den
Joined
·
1,855 Posts
I take it that you have that tour or two in Afghanistan that would warrant the ability to "clean their clock"? Rawles doesn't have like 8 years in the military. No, he has 9. In Military Intelligence. Make all the jokes you want about the oxymoronic statement of "Military Intelligence" but the man is not an idiot. Even his detractors would admit that.
Btw, any ardent followers of any faith would look like a cult from the outside. Your assessment is noted and dismissed for purposes of the "review".
The difference in their "screwing" with people and the other's in the book were pretty obvious. The stopped and assessed. The other's murdered and looted. You didn't catch that? Someone of your obvious intelligence should have seen the dichotomy that Rawles was portraying.
If you believe there is too much "silliness" to be taken seriously, you should write a book extolling the virtues of your design and plan for a retreat. I'm not joking.
Joined
·
1,310 Posts
I read it about a month ago. The writing was second rate, but the information was very very good. It was the technical detail that made the book worth reading. There were too many dead end stories, like the two 'on the lam' brothers, but those were there to illustrate certain survival/SHTF concepts. You really have to almost consider the book a textbook not to find any fault with it.
I did give it to my buddy, though, and need to call him and see what he thinks. He will be at my place SHTF, so it's important he and I be on the same page.
I did give it to my buddy, though, and need to call him and see what he thinks. He will be at my place SHTF, so it's important he and I be on the same page.
First read what became 'patriots' as 'the grey nineties' and then 'triple ought.'
Lots of good information, but holes you could drive an Abrams through. That doesn't take away from the good parts of the story of course.
Yes, the protagonists have everything go their way. I am guilty of writing that way myself.
Tom S.
Lots of good information, but holes you could drive an Abrams through. That doesn't take away from the good parts of the story of course.
Yes, the protagonists have everything go their way. I am guilty of writing that way myself.
Tom S.
Joined
·
925 Posts
No one said he was was an idiot, he has his opinion and others have theirs. Since the S has not hit the fan yet NO ONE knows how it's going to play out.
IMO there aren't any authorities on the subject, we each have to take a good look at our OWN abilities, locations etc. and be our own experts.
I don't know about that!
:Well I guess we are going to have to disagree on this point. IMO they had no right to mess with anyone on a public road and it wouldn't have taken long till they tangled with the wrong folks.
Should the S hit the fan in my neck of the woods and some of our folks got hassled traveling peaceably on a public road. They wouldn't like the results when a few rounds of .50 BMG API rip though their house from a 1k a few evenings a month till they get the hint.
Little to no risk to the attackers and probably would have their collective, busy body panties in a real tight bind. They would be lucky if folks would be so generous and not wait till two or three are in the garden and lay them down proper. The rest could run to the fox holes and sit there for a month if they want, but every single day they were in the open they would KNOW they could be next. Would be no big trick to feint an attack draw them out and really put the boot to them. The attacker only has to get lucky once and always has the option to withdraw under their own terms, but the self appointed "road police" would have to be lucky every single day.
The good news is real folks would simply mind their own business while keeping a vigilant watch on the public road.
I still don't understand why the hell any survivalist would place his retreat next to the road in the first place just escapes me from the git go. It just invites all kinds of unnecessary drama IMO.
Are you suggesting that only folks who write books are qualified to opine on the subject?
Between the two books "One Second After" gets my nod, it doesn't come off quite so self indulgent, and the human element was pretty well done.
I'm not joking either!
Take care,
Den
Joined
·
67 Posts
One Second After is a novel, Patriots is an instructional book poorly disguised as a novel.
Dont get me wrong they are both good for what they are but I enjoyed OSA more.
Um, and they did seem a little cultish to me. I would go crazy if I had to be on "fireguard" during the collapse of civilization.
Dont get me wrong they are both good for what they are but I enjoyed OSA more.
Um, and they did seem a little cultish to me. I would go crazy if I had to be on "fireguard" during the collapse of civilization.
Joined
·
1,698 Posts
I'm glad to see someone else was bothered by the same thing: The main characters in Patriots applied double standards in several situations.
When some of the main characters encountered a particular road block, they objected to it on the basis of it being a public road and they had no right, etc. Instead of bypassing the roadblock and moving on, they set up at a distance and basically slew the whole bunch of them. Their presumption was that they were the only "good guys" and that anyone else with a road block were "brigands".'
Two other main characters (a married couple) came under fire at a road block and actually lost their vehicle and much of their equipment. At that point they were screwed and had to go on foot (as they specifically stated). But instead of moving off immediately (thus maximizing their safety) they waited in the dark until the brigands were all asleep and killed them all in their sleeping bags. This action was *not* for the purpose of recovering their vehicle or equipment, which was destroyed in the initial encounter. It was solely for the explicitly stated purpose of payback.
Now, I can't say for sure what I would do in these situations. But the author (JWR) took great pains to constantly pontificate about his characters' being Christians. They were constantly praying about this and that and avoiding using bad language like a bunch of kindergarten teachers. I wasn't expecting revenge killing for its own sake to be promoted by such a supposedly God-fearing author and his heroes.
I considered the tone of this book to be the epitome of situational morality. The main characters engaged in revenge killing in several situations, yet never had any moral qualms whatsoever about it. In fact, JWR never devoted a single sentence to exploring the morality of revenge killing or killing in general for that matter.
Speaking of killing, *all* of the main characters were ordinary people from middle class backgrounds who had *never* taken a human life before. Very soon after TSHTF, they had all killed repeatedly. Why didn't JWR explore the very real possibility that his main characters would become traumatized by so much killing, particularly a first killing? The characters were in fact *completely* unaffected by all the killing they did. Don't get me wrong: much of the killing was in self defense and completely justifiable. But even when it's justified, it's normal to be affected by taking another's life.
1 - 20 of 80 Posts
Join the discussion
