Customer Reviews

How Wars Are Won: The 13 Rules of War - from Ancient Greece to the War on Terror

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

There is no question that Alexander has a brilliant command of historical battles. As a guidebook about what the 13 rules of war are and examples of them in real life, this book ranks at the top. And the battles are described in such interesting detail that the reader finds himself cheering for the brilliant general and sighing for the unfortunate opponent. The problem I found with the book is that it reads much like an encyclopedia. Every chapter is completely disconnected from the others and there is little "cross referencing" indicating what the drawbacks and weaknesses of many of the rules are. Using superior weapons or methods might always be good but attacking the heart of the enemy might be good sometimes and disastrous other times. To his credit, the author does sometimes say what the hapless opponent should have done.

Still, the book is a good read for discriptions of battle strategies and the background of some major campaigns.

Noted Military Historian Bevin Alexander's latest effort represents an expansion of BH Liddell Hart's work. In his classic text on strategy, Liddell Hart differentiates between direct and indirect methods of warfare, and finds the latter to be by far the more successful approach. Liddell Hart does not examine different types of indirect action, however, and this is where Alexander's work comes in. Alexander begins with the premise that frontal assaults against fortified positions should never be attempted. Attacks should always come from the side or rear. This has the advantage of striking the enemy where they are weaker, and perhaps more importantly, it throws them off psychologically, disorienting, and frightening them. Alexander lists thirteen such variations on these same ideas, such as encirclement, holding in one place and striking another, creating diversions, cutting of the enemy's retreat, etc. Each method receives its own chapter, accompanied by several historical examples of the successful execution of the tactic, usually taken from as many different eras as possible. Of particular note are the examples taken from Stonewall Jackson's campaigns, a subject on which Alexander is one of the leading authorities. In writing this work it seems clear that Alexander is trying to place himself in line with the classics of military theory: Sun-Tzu, Clausewitz, Liddell Hart. Only time will tell whether or not he achieves this lofty goal. In the meantime there is little doubt that this fascinating and well-written work should be closely examined military strategists, historians, and armchair generals.

September 11 marked a turning point in the grim history of warfare. Though the attacking terrorists were given aid and comfort by at least one rogue state with an anti-American agenda, they were not acting as the agents of any particular country. They used weapons that they found "in the theater" (i.e., fuel-laden civilian airliners) to inflict enormous casulaties on an unsuspecting civilian population. The 21st century thus began with the first "asymmetrical" war between a superpower and a shadowy but deadly opponent.

Bevin Alexander agrees that September 11 is a watershed event that "dramatically changed the face of war." But he also notes that the terrorists used the ancient tactic of the ambush, a hit-and-run strike against a defenseless or unprepared opponent. Though the "war against terrorism" will doubtless offer up cruel novelties in the years to come, Bevin argues that history still has much to teach us about the strategies that win wars.

"How Wars Are Won" devotes a single chapter to each of 13 rules of war. Bevin explains how these rules work in practice by describing examples drawn from throughout history. For instance, the rule of "defend, then attack" is illustrated by battles that occurred during wars as diverse as the Byzantine invasion of Italy, the Hundred Years War and the American Civil War.

Bevin writes fairly well, and he does an excellent job of explaining why history's greatest generals won their battles, and why lesser leaders managed to lose. I came away with a much better appreciation of the genius of Napoleon, Alexander the Great and Stonewall Jackson.

"How Wars are Won" also offers many interesting observations about how future wars are likely to be waged--including the one that will probably be fought in Iraq. Bevin's book is required reading for another dark time in world history.

Bevin Alexander's book is a must read for any one interested in the principles of warfare and how future warfare is likely to be conducted. On page one he gets to the crux of the matter. "Two unrelated developments have fused to produce a true revolution in warfare. The first is highly accurate and extremely powerful weapons. The second is the discovery that modern conventional armies can be defeated by guerilla methods." His first chapter breaks the most new ground for how future wars will be fought by the U.S. His idea of "swarming" using pods or clusters of small units tailored for specific missions was very much in evidence in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The use of these units to surround and attack from many different angles simultaneously using superior weaponry will be how our forces fight in the foreseeable future. He recognizes that our technological superiority will be our great advantage in warfare for years to come.

Alexander's chapter on terrorist's strengths and weakness' is very illuminating since it was written after the September 11th attacks. "Terrorism has one great strength: it makes sneak attacks on unsuspecting people, and thus is difficult to prevent. But it also has one profound weakness: it operates as a clandestine cell in an alien environment, and thus can be isolated." He gives a good account of how to fight terrorism and why terrorists ultimately loose.

This book is a great read for laymen and professional alike. In light of today's dangers that we as a nation face I highly recommend reading this book.

This book kinda caught be by surprise at first. Mainly it talked about how to win wars nowadays, against terrorist and not a full fledge conventional army. I continued to read though and found that the author does a very good job of comparing strategies used in the past with ways to win wars today. Another fact I enjoyed was that he does not care which side he is on. Constantly I read books that only take the American side, well in this book it plainly shows stupid maneuvers by American commanders from the enemy side. However, if you are someone who wants a book dedicated to looking at past battles and how they were won this is not for you. Although it does go into fantastic detail with plenty of maps, the book is about today and how to win the small unit actions required in todays world.

As a relative newcomer to the field of military history and of war strategy, I found this a very well written, clear, and informative book. I had read some of Clausewitz and read all of Liddell-Hart's classic book before this one, and wished I'd read this one first because it's more accessible and enjoyable to read. Actually the Liddell-Hart book was fine as a first book; it's not difficult reading and the book does offer valuable insights which have been proven historically time and time again.

Prose-wise, Liddell-Hart can write with great clarity and even inspiration, but you often have to slog through some pretty long dry spells to get to that. It's sort of like what one music critic said of Wagner's operas: "Wagner is a composer of great moments but awful quarter-hours." :-) I do respect the ultimate greatness of Liddell-Hart's contribution, though: he is certainly one of the great theoreticians, but still, this book is better for a beginner. Then you could go on to the other books if your interest is piqued.

My only criticism (as mentioned by another writer here) is the lack of connection between the chapters. The different topics are covered well and in detail, with many illuminating examples, but the chapters essentially stand alone as principles and for beginner like myself, at least some overall integration would have been helpful. But I've looked at maybe a dozen other books on war strategy and battle history at this point and I think this one is the best. It still rates five stars and is well worth the money.

Another recommendation for a good book on strategy is Colonel John Boyd's long briefing paper, which is available online as a PDF file to print out, entitled Patterns of Conflict. Boyd was a famous fighter pilot who made huge contributions to fighter design and tactics, and also later in life got interested in general war strategy, and wrote this wonderful brief and white paper on the subject. It's been said that Boyd is the most important American patriot you've never heard of.

The paper discusses battles all the way back to Alexander the Great, the Persians. vs. the Greeks, Sun Tzu, the Mongols, Napoleon, World War I, WWII, modern guerilla tactics, etc., not just modern fighter strategy. It's only 193 pages long and is just solid stuff all the way through, often summarizing, comparing, and critiquing the major theorist's ideas using charts and diagrams, which are very helpful for a rapid grasp of the different ideas. I used up my black printer cartridge and had to buy another one, and it was well worth the money. If you do a search online you'll find links to it and you can print it out. If you get Boyd's paper and Alexander's book you'll be well on your way in terms of understanding modern and historical battle strategy.

I am not a military buff/strategist. Basically this book laid out 13 classic tactics to war. That itself would make an interesting reading. For each tactics the author gave an average of 2 positive and 2 negative campaigns as demonstrations as how best to apply the tactics. Through the examples, readers can discern that the author is well-versed in the topic with much knowledge to share.

The author did provide great insight/context on how the environment and resources shaped the formation of some weapons. The author took care to explain how the chariot and cavalry were formed over decades taking into account the societal and climax of the nations that adopted them.

The book's short comings were that some examples given too brief or slightly technical. For this I leave it to the readers to decide if it's an appropriate observation. Another short coming was that the author laid out some negative demonstrations where the commanders should have, but did not opt for some more model tactics in their campaign. For this, the author illustrated the WHAT (has been or not been done), but did not clearly explain the WHY (one option is favor over another), which I feel is equally important for the readers of this book to learn (from the defeats).

Another area for improvement was that more flavors could be added on how the tactics could be applied in the current climax. Granted that may not be the objectives of the book to speculate on the hypothetical and provide materials for potential enemies, that would definitively make the book even more fruitful to the reader with the author's lateral insights.

On the whole, it's a book worth reading especially when its neatly organized into independent chapters. Hence, I give it a 4 out of 5 stars.

Written by a seasoned historian, this book takes you into the minds of the commanders on both sides, as you relive some of the most innovative campaigns in history. The author analyzes
each campaign step by step, comparing not only the moves made by each player, but also pointing out possible alternative moves not taken, and their consequences. Sometimes you feel like you're watching the World Chess Championship ringside. You can experience the visceral thrill of battle right in the safety of your living room, and appreciate the brilliance of the great generals, as they unleash unexpected or unstoppable attacks on their opponents, as they move towards checkmate in the great game.

And if this leaves you hungry for more, check out the author's earlier masterpiece, "How Great Generals Win" - after all buying both books gets you a hefty discount on Amazon! Here the author studies the methods of each general in considerably more detail than in his latest book. Or if you're an aficionado of WWII, go grab "How Hitler Could Have Won World War II", which is a great piece of kriegspiel.

In this book Bevin Alexander details 13 rules of war that he has deduced from studying battles from the last 2000 years of history. There are 13 chapters with each chapter detailing what the rule is and giving examples from the past of the rule being put into practice. Alexander also tries to predict how the rule will be applied to war in the future. More specifically, he tries to predict how the rule will apply to America's war on terror.

The chapters contain some interesting information about some famous past battles which make the book worth reading if you're a military history buff. Unfortunately, I think Alexander falls short when trying to draw lessons about past battles and applying them to the future American conflicts. He doesn't seem to take into account just how much weaker the Taliban forces were than the American military. He also doesn't appreciate that in the initial period of the war the American special forces units were working with local Afghan troops, part of the Northern Alliance, whom provided a ground force the US was unable to send initially.

In short, interesting military history but I find his predictions about future conflicts unconvincing. As I think has been born out by the decade of conflict that has occurred since the book was first published.

This is a book without the heavy personal history of the people involved it is directed at the action taken or not taken by the armies involved.

A very good reference book for the military history reader.