21 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Inaccurate, one-sided, narrow-minded opinion of a bored officer, December 29, 2005
This review is from: Mercenaries: Soldiers of Fortune, from Ancient Greece to Today#s Private Military Companies (Mass Market Paperback)
Too often retired officers as well as politicians get bored since they can no longer "shine" among their peers. Many of them start writing books so they can glorify themselves among distinguished guests while tasting a good brandy and a cigar. The first book or two are usually good because they write about what they like with passion. But like everything else, after a while it becomes another routine. This is Lanning's fourteenth book where he already employs a "research assistant" and basically all the information is copied from other books that, unlike Lanning some of the authors did a real historical investigation.
The first part of this book deals with mercenaries from the ancient world such as the Greeks, Romans and so forth. While I am not a history buff I believe the accounts to be fairly correct. The quality of the book suffers a twist though when it deals with modern history. Not only it is full of inaccuracies but also the author, which thus far had not been overtly prejudiced shows a biased opinion of whom is a mercenary or not and who are the good ones versus the bad ones. He defines, "mercenaries...these men who have fought for money and plunder rather than for cause or patriotism" but then, he includes in his report units such as the "Lafayette Escadrille", a unit of American pilots that fought alongside the French in the Great War.
These pilots were fighting for a cause and not for money and plunder and therefore, by his definition do not qualify as mercenaries. He also places them in the French Foreign Legion, which is incorrect. Although it is true that because of their foreign status they were only allowed to enlist in the Legion, they fought as infantrymen since the Legion never had nor has an aviation unit. It was only after many efforts that these brave men first started to fly in various French aviation units and finally convinced the authorities to form their own unit, L'escadrille 124, also known as L'escadrille Lafayette.
The author also considers the Gurkhas and the French Foreign Legion as being mercenaries but once again he's wrong because the Gurkhas are remnants of the Nepalese units that fought the British and after an armistice England decided to incorporate these valiant Nepalese fighters in their own ranks. The Gurkhas are therefore England's allies and do not fight for plunder or offer their services to the highest bidder, which is the true definition of a mercenary.
The same goes for the Legion that fights for France and no one else. If Lanning considers the Legionnaires as mercenaries he should also include the Israeli Defense Forces that, like the Legion accept volunteers from around the world - but there's no mention of the IDD in the book nor there is any mention of the battalions of Senegal and morocco that still fight for the French. Mercenaries present in the recent war in ex-Yugoslavia are not mentioned either. Executive Outcomes, the largest mercenary company in the modern world that was present in almost all African conflicts, only deserves a mere passage. Too many units were forgotten and others that do not fit the scope of the book are mentioned just because the only knowledge of mercenaries the author has, come from books where he copied the information from. In the last part of this atrocious book, Lanning changes his definition of mercenaries to include "private military companies...that provide behind-the-scenes support in areas such as food preparation, water purification and waste removal." Now there he's just being ridiculous.
The facetious arrogance of this ignorant becomes intolerable when we reach the chapter about the French Foreign Legion. I personally served in the Legion for 8½ years and I know the history first hand. I can attest that his accounts are false at least at 80%. There is a picture that he claims depicts legionnaires, which is a lie and it can easily be proven just by looking at the uniforms. He managed to distort even the most obvious details that can be found in the Legion's site. He says the Legion does not accept French, which is another lie. He also states that the uniform still includes the neck protection, one more lie. He claims legionnaires earn a meager salary but when I was in Africa with the legion, my salary was four times higher than my friends' from the US marines Corps. He has so little knowledge of the F.F.L. that he spends more time writing about books and movies made about this force and paraphrasing an American poet. The rest of the chapter is just a vehicle for Lanning to bash the Legion, that he knows so little about.
That chapter starts with the following paragraph:
"Of all the group of men who have offered themselves as soldiers in exchange for money, perhaps none is better known than the French Foreign Legion - While the legion achieved its reputation in battlefields around the world - surprisingly... often in defeat - it became legendary through a long history of "spin" and good publicity in books, songs, and motion pictures."
Of the thousands of battles of the Legion, he conveniently forgot the victorious ones. They are too many to include in this review but I would like to remind that gentleman that in WWII the Legion obtained the first allied victory against what was then considered "the invincible" Wermacht (the Nazi infantry). When neither the British nor the French were able to dislodge the Germans from the Norwegian mountains, the French government decided to form a legion's unit specialized in mountain warfare. The 13th half brigade of Foreign Legion, in which I served, was then created with Legionnaires from other regiments. At the price of heavy casualties (as usual) the Legion won the battles of Narvik and Bjervik, pushing the Germans out of the country.
This paragraph only serves to show Lanning's ignorance about the Legion. Although it is true that the Legion always suffered many casualties, it is useful to remember that this elite corps was (and is) present in all conflicts and is assigned the hardest tasks. Another interesting concept is the definition of victory and defeat. Contrary to popular belief, victory does not rely on the number of casualties among enemy ranks, otherwise the United States would have won the Vietnam War. Victory is to achieve the goals set forth prior to the battle, such as occupying a strategic point, rescue friendly forces or just enforce some ideology. We must not forget that Gandhi won his fight against the British without firing a single shot although he had losses among his followers. Whatever the mission may be, its accomplishment brings victory.
This brings me to Lannings' account of Legion's first great battle in 1863 at Camerone (Mexico) as he portrays it as being a total defeat for the Legion. I will not extend the narration since this information is readily available on the internet. The city of Puebla was under siege by the French. The Legion had the mission to protect the supplying convoys. When the Mexicans got informed that a convoy transporting 3 million Francs, tons of supplies and ammunitions was about to arrive, they organized a two-thousand-men force (800 cavalrymen and 1200 infantrymen). The legion sent one company of 65 foot soldiers to protect the convoy. The Mexicans decided to firstly eliminate the escort in order to pillage the goods in all tranquility. They attacked the Legionnaires with cavalry charges that revealed inefficient. The legionnaire's commander chose to draw the opponents away from the cargo and took refuge in a barn. After 11 hours of fight and repeated refusals to surrender, 3 legionnaires, out of ammunitions remained. As they charged the enemy with their bayonets
The Mexican colonel tried to spare their lives by making them surrender. The Legionnaires agreed if their wounded would be treated, the prisoners spared and could keep their weapons. The end result of the battle was that 49 Legionnaires died along with their 3 officers, 12 were made prisoners and later freed. On the Mexican side 300 died and another 300 were wounded. The convoy reached its destination untouched.
The 15-page chapter is punctuated by third-hand accounts rather than real historical facts. Lanning spends more time writing about the movies, paraphrasing poets, narrating the story of the author of "Beau Geste", which was enlisted for a short period before defecting and expressing his own poorly informed, injurious opinion about the Legion.
A FORMER WARRIOR
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Poorly researched, December 16, 2005
This review is from: Mercenaries: Soldiers of Fortune, from Ancient Greece to Today#s Private Military Companies (Mass Market Paperback)
I don't know where to start. Incorrect dates. Incorrect, exaggerated or just plain ridiculous accounts.
After reading it, I began to wonder if it was researched on the internet.
The mercenaries who fought in Angola in 1976 are almost nonexistent in this book, even though most of what the public knows about soldiers of fortune is a direct result of this debacle.
The accounts of Bob Denards actions in the Comoro Islands is extremely inaccurate, as if the author lifted it verbatum from some pulp magazine.
When the author discusses "Mad Mike" Hoare, he begins by lauding him highly, but in the end depicts him as a pitiable has-been. And his account of the Seychelles operation is ridiculous in its recounting.
I could go on and on, but the more I write this review, the angrier I become.
Save your money.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
