Sir John Winthrop Hackett (1910–1997)

Wow, this is probably the longest a book has sat on my "currently reading" shelf on Goodreads. It's hard to really give this book a truly fair review considering the authors were prognosticating and didn't have the benefit of hindsight like I do reading it now. So much of their predictions for the future are not just off, but hilariously wrong: the US and Iran remaining staunch allies through the 1980s, China and Japan allying to form a "sphere of co-prosperity," East and West Germany never reunifying, etc. But some of their less specific predictions were quite prescient: the idea of specific citizenship in a more economically and diplomatically unified Europe becoming less important, nationalist sentiment in border republics of the USSR helping lead to its downfall, and the advancement of telecommunications leading to the rise of telecommuting, making where you live less and less relevant to your employment.

The authors personal political bias seeps through often, blaming liberals and trade unionists and "peaceniks" for a decline in military ability for NATO that almost costs them the war. They blame generational shifts for not having proper military officers ready to serve. The book reads like a thinly veiled Cold Warrior's appeal to ramp up defense budgets, relying on a severe misunderstanding of the actual aims and motivations of their adversary.

The speculative history (or for us now, alternate history) the authors create is quite intriguing to read. The authors weave a tale of international and domestic events that lead to the outbreak of war in August 1985 that while some of it quite implausible, does tend to follow its own logic if your accept the initial premise. I found myself really wanting to dive in more to the series of events they laid out, and found myself craving an old school History Channel documentary made about it.

The real reason the review is as low as it is, and why it took me almost a year to actually get through this book (reading 14 books in between starting and finishing it) is while its marketed as a thriller paperback, it reads most of the time like a very dry think tank report. The entire middle section of the book is dedicated to intricate discussions of force structure and armaments development. Chapter after chapter of the reshuffling of chains of command, civil defense development, replacement of aircraft models with new ones, etc. While this information is important to understanding the war, it is overly detailed here to a point it just serves to dissuade you from reading more. At least half of the info contained within could have been cut and summarized much more efficiently.

Unless you're a cold war military buff, there's not really enough redeeming here to really make this worth your time.… (plus d'informations)

The author of this illustrated history of professional military personnel begins by noting that “It is hard to conceive a future with no fighting. . . . There will be violence and those whose business is its management now assume a more important place in our societies than ever before.” Likewise, he contends, “the skills and qualities of the professionals in the ordered application of force” are also more important than ever; it is therefore critical to understand the history and role of the military over time.

Thus the author takes a look back over the past four thousand years, employing over 180 illustrations to trace the rise and development of the professional soldier. Following the Introduction, chapters include:

Knights and Mercenaries
Armies of the Nation State
Prussia and Napoleon
The Nineteenth-Century Officer
Society and the Soldier 1914-18
Today and Tomorrow
Leadership

This intimate look at the nature of soldiers themselves rather than a focus on wars generally or battles in particular allows the author to focus on who the soldiers were and why they fought, and what happened to them during war and afterwards. While the book certainly needs updating, it will still make a good addition to any military library.… (plus d'informations)

Peter Connolly is certainly a great illustrator of ancient warfare. Though, this is not really his book I think his contribution dominates. It's a collection of writings about the systematics of ancient warfare. (How many infantry, hows many archers etc.). And, I must confess to sometimes being overwhelmed and bored by the endless detail of serried ranks of soldiers and how they were organised into units and sub units. (Seems to me that there were almost an infinite way to organise an army. though a few things shone through .......the development of the chariot allowed an archer to become highly mobile; The greek phalanx, when used skilfully and combined with cavalry and light infantry was pretty hard to overcome. Though the macedonians improved on it with longer lances...and it was the Macedonian phalanx that took Alexander on his rampage through Persia and to India.
Not all the authors are equally skilled ....must say I found the sections by Nick Segunda rather heavy going...maybe just a bit too much boring detail. However, the book is saved by the remarkable detailed (and apparently accurate) pictures by Peter Connolly. They are gems and bring the whole to life. It's hard to picture the power of the phalanx in action from old worn relief carvings on walls or columns but with Connolloy's paintings, one can truly become the armchair general. (It would be very hard to come up against that bristling wall of spears).
I also found it interesting how fashions came and went in warfare. The Roman legions were pretty much invincible ...except when they entered the Teutonburg Forest ...or were fighting other Roman legions. But eventually they found themselves up against the Alani mounted on armoured horses ...and began forming up pretty much like the Macedonian phalanx. I found it a bit strange that the romans didn't seem to rely too much on archers yet archers came into their own again with the Mongols and later with the English longbow.
Maybe if there is a weakness in the book it is the paucity of data about logistics; how did these armies provide food and equipment for long expeditions. There is a bit of detail but it seems to me that the actual battle time was very short relative to the time that would have to have been spent in provisioning and transporting armies.
Despite the boring details ...which seem really suited to like-minded individuals......I give it four stars.… (plus d'informations)