Rating: 
Summary: Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
Review: This is a sprawling, but very important and perceptive analysis. Luttwak's often revised book has several messages. The most topically interesting one was apparently missed by the reviewers, who concentrated on the paradoxical nature of strategic relations.
Luttwak notes that modern industrial societies will not tolerate casualties in war, and that therefore battlefield strategies must focus on winning wars without direct contact with the enemy and without risk of lives. He claims that while the strategic bombing of WW II was a failure, strategic bombing as practised in Iraq in 1991 and in Kossovo was a success. According to Luttwak, the difference is more accurate intelligence and more accurate bombing - not necessarily cruise-missiles.He points out that with a smaller expenditure of bombs in 1 month in 1991 than the allies had expended in Germany in 1945, the coalition succeeding in totally disrupting Iraq communications and industry. The outlines of how the next war ought to be fought, and in fact was fought, were clear from Luttwak's presentation. One almost gets the feeling that the war was fought to prove his theory, and it is very likely that changes in US defense policy are being based on lessons drawn from the success of the war, in the light of Luttwak's recommendations. Luttwak does not take into account that not all enemies are equal. The strategy that worked so well for Iraq might not work for a more organized and determined foe such as North Korea.
Rating: 
Summary: What on Earth is he thinking?!?
Review: Utter hogwash. War is violence with a purpose not a physical phenomenon that burns itself out like a forest fire. The function of every war is not to bring peace but to acheive specific political objectives (cf. Clausewitz). If you intervene in a war, you are not interrupting some chemical reaction. You are acting politically to alter the course of the conflict: perhaps saving lives, perhaps not; perhaps helping to bring about a peaceful solution to the conflict, perhaps not. I'd like to see how "logical" Luttwak would be if it was his family and town that was being subjected to sustained genocidal attack. The clue to all this is his view that "other peoples' wars" should be allowed to run their course. You cannot but conclude that "other people" are not quite like him...
| 
