Military Misfortunes : The Anatomy of Failure in War

Rating:
Summary: What?
Review: I am not sure what to make of this book. The model is nothing new if you really think about it. It's bottled snake oil to some extent. The analysis is arbitrary (that does not mean wrong) and one can find subtle flaws. There are many interesting facts, and other ways to look at events and battles, but the book is useful only to the narrow-minded. I wonder who wrote the other reviews. His friends?

Rating:
Summary: Excellent and highly recommended
Review: If you enjoy this type "failure" analysis (such as the book "Normal Accidents"), I think you'll find this to be an excellent read. My interest is primarily in business strategy and related issues (not in military history and strategy per se), but the authors present material which I found to be very useful across many different professions. My complements to the authors for good cases, good analysis and good writing. I really had great fun reading this book. It could have used better proof reading, but the errors enountered in no way hindered the presentation in any material way.

Rating:
Summary: Campus nonsense, no dirty boots
Review: If you're an armchair general who never served in the military and who believes that professors know more about war than soldiers, this is the book for you. If you love dreary writing, buy two copies. If tendentious history is your thing, buy three. This is campus arrogance with little sense of the complexity, confusion and danger of battle. But if you're just aching to believe that generals are all dummies, and that anybody with a doctorate in international relations could run our wars better than the men and women who sweat, bleed and die for our country, this is the perfect book for you. Good trees died for this.

Rating:
Summary: Applies analytical model to six "military failures"
Review: Military historians will enjoy this book. I read it as part of the Air War College curriculum. The theme of the book is that often military blunders are the result of or enhanced by institutional/organizational flaws. The first couple of chapters lay out an analytical model that is used in the remainder of the book. The model combines in-depth knowledge of the campaign with a tailored, layered critical approach for each campaign. In the remaining chapters the model is applied to the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Yom Kippur War 1973, the US anti-sub effort in 1942, the Brits' Sulva Bay enterprise at Gallipoli 1915, the US retreat from the Yalu River in Korea 1950, and the collapse of the French Army & Air Force in 1940. The six campaigns are very readable and enjoyable. The style is crisp and succint. I learned alot of interesting details about the campaigns. The Gooch & Cohen model is not a tool for prediction of the success of future campaigns - only for historical analysis. Nonetheless, once you get through the first two chapters, you'll be in for an enjoyable read. Try it.