The Future of War: Power, Technology and American World Dominance in the 21st Century

Rating:
Summary: A vision too far
Review: For a book which purports to see accurately into the future, the Friedmans seem to have been unable to completely grab onto the past. Most unpardonable are technical inaccuracies (like World War II torpedos that go 100 miles per hour) for the premise so often repeated seems to be that technology has begun to feed upon itself, i.e., become "senile". Even if that's so, their wholesale indictment of entire proven weapon systems (like Aegis or even gun projectiles, for that matter) ignores both the incremental nature of such developments as well as fiscal constraints that channel them (e.g., "Star Wars"). While reading about exoskeletons and plasma weapons is entertaining, shooting wars even 10 years from now may not employ much if any of this speculative technology. That being the case, the Friedmans may have tried, then, to go a vision too far.

Rating:
Summary: Worthwhile, but flawed, work
Review: In light the number of stars I have given this book, I feel I should start off be stating that there is tremendous merit in this work. The authors do a superb job of pointing out the root causes of warfare, and why it is naïve to expect that armed conflict has gone by the wayside. They then go on to point out the challenges to American global preeminence, and what needs to be done to assure it.

Specifically they look to precision-guided munitions as the key weapons of future combat, and space as its primary battleground. They make compelling arguments for each, particularly regarding the obsolescence of the primary weapons of today's Pax Americana: the tank, the strategic bomber, and the aircraft carrier. Furthermore, the completely debunk the myth of nuclear supremacy on the modern battlefield.

The problems with this book that I alluded to are twofold. First, the editing is appalling; there are numerous typos and misprints (for example, referring to a torpedo that can travel at 400 knots). While the knowledgeable reader can usually infer what the authors' intent is, editorial errors always make for a frustrating reading experience.

The second concern cuts to the heart of the book. While the authors do a superb job of defining the future battlefield, they offer very little in terms of how we get there from where we currently stand. The weapons systems they describe will almost certainly come to pass, but they neither make suggestions as to the allocation of R&D dollars, nor offer any sense of what research should receive priority. In the absence of such commentary, their bold assertions frequently seem more like dogma than scholarship. Moreover, they ignore potential doctrinal changes that might extend the service life of current weapons systems while increasing their effectiveness.

At its best, `The Future of War' is a visionary look into the future of armed conflict. The authors correctly grasp the dawning senility of the weapons currently deployed, and paint a bold picture of what the future battlefield will look like. Unfortunately, while brilliantly describing the future, they completely ignore the near to middle term. As a result, `The Future of War' while well worth reading, can only be treated as half of an equation. One must read the works of authors like Leonhard and MacGregor to truly appreciate the shape of the modern battlefield.

Rating:
Summary: Worthwhile, but flawed, work
Review: In light the number of stars I have given this book, I feel I should start off be stating that there is tremendous merit in this work. The authors do a superb job of pointing out the root causes of warfare, and why it is naïve to expect that armed conflict has gone by the wayside. They then go on to point out the challenges to American global preeminence, and what needs to be done to assure it.

Specifically they look to precision-guided munitions as the key weapons of future combat, and space as its primary battleground. They make compelling arguments for each, particularly regarding the obsolescence of the primary weapons of today's Pax Americana: the tank, the strategic bomber, and the aircraft carrier. Furthermore, the completely debunk the myth of nuclear supremacy on the modern battlefield.

The problems with this book that I alluded to are twofold. First, the editing is appalling; there are numerous typos and misprints (for example, referring to a torpedo that can travel at 400 knots). While the knowledgeable reader can usually infer what the authors' intent is, editorial errors always make for a frustrating reading experience.

The second concern cuts to the heart of the book. While the authors do a superb job of defining the future battlefield, they offer very little in terms of how we get there from where we currently stand. The weapons systems they describe will almost certainly come to pass, but they neither make suggestions as to the allocation of R&D dollars, nor offer any sense of what research should receive priority. In the absence of such commentary, their bold assertions frequently seem more like dogma than scholarship. Moreover, they ignore potential doctrinal changes that might extend the service life of current weapons systems while increasing their effectiveness.

At its best, 'The Future of War' is a visionary look into the future of armed conflict. The authors correctly grasp the dawning senility of the weapons currently deployed, and paint a bold picture of what the future battlefield will look like. Unfortunately, while brilliantly describing the future, they completely ignore the near to middle term. As a result, 'The Future of War' while well worth reading, can only be treated as half of an equation. One must read the works of authors like Leonhard and MacGregor to truly appreciate the shape of the modern battlefield.

Rating:
Summary: Smart Thoughts Important to Future of National Security
Review: The authors begin by noting that there is "a deep chasm between the advent of technology and its full implementation in doctrine and strategy." In their history of failure they note how conventional wisdom always seems to appreciate the systems that won the past wars, and observes that in the U.S. military there is a long history of transferring power from the political and military leadership to the technical and acquisition managers, all of whom have no real understanding of the current and future needs of the men who will actually fight. They address America's vulnerability in both U.S. based logistics and in overseas transport means-"Destroying even a portion of American supply vessels could so disrupt the tempo of a logistical build-up as to delay offensive operations indefinitely." They have a marvelous section on the weaknesses of U.S. data gathering tools, noting for example that satellites provide only a static picture of one very small portion of the battlefield, rather that the wide-area and dynamic "situational awareness" that everyone agrees is necessary. They go on to gore other sacred oxes, including the Navy's giant ships such as the carrier (and implicitly the new LPH for Marines as well as the ill-conceived arsenal ship) and the largest of the aircraft proposed by the Air Force. They ultimately conclude that the future of war demands manned space stations that are able to integrate total views of the world with control of intercontinental precision systems, combined with a complete restructuring of the ground forces (most of which will be employed at the squad level) and a substantial restructuring of our navel force to provide for many small fast platforms able to swarm into coastal areas.

Rating:
Summary: Very enlightening, but seriously flawed at the same time
Review: The book traces the history of land, sea, air, and space arms development. A lot of interesting trends, huge amount of purely factual information, analysis -- all very, very interesting, especially for a layman. Although it's a bit dated by now, the book is unquestionably worth the money and reading time. It educates in general and gives structure to disconnected reports you get from the media all the time, you begin to understand what belongs where, and perceive a deeper, systemic meaning of different events (like the current missile defense plans, for example.)

There are problems as well: the book's hastily written (fragmented, repetitive, at times overwhelms with data), and poorly edited. There are cases where argument seems made fit the theory - for example, at the very beginning it's proposed that foreign trade has declined during the last century, which is supported by the decline of it as a percentage of GDP, but what about absolute numbers? Nothing. OK. It's hard to believe that foreign trade today is actually lesser than in 1920, and this makes me wonder about more things like that where I'm simply not competent enough to notice. The other reviewers complained about technical inaccuracies, so I will definitely be careful using the numbers from this book w/o checking them against more solid sources. That said, the numbers aren't what's most important in that work.

To summarize I'd say this: the book is definitely worthwhile as it is, but a second, updated chronologically and cleaned up editorially edition would be highly welcome.

Rating:
Summary: Insight into the unforeseen consequences of technology
Review: This book directs one's attention to the discussion the way we have thought about war will no longer be as relevant in the future. The notion of "weapons reaching and obsolete status" points to a central thesis in the book--that America will remain the preponderant military and technical power of the 21st century. This of course may be a comforting piece of information for policy shapers and makers, and business peoples. But is it really ? Such dominance by one nation is bound to lead to the shifting of the balance of power among nations unless the movement toward internationalization proves to be successful. However, aspiring powers and emerging nations that wish to be freed from this American dominance may -- and there seems to be information to support this -- seek weapons of mass destruction to counter US global hegemony.

This book made a clearly argued case for American Dominance, but it does not help us to see the political/moral future. But within its parameters, its an "eye-opener."

Rating:
Summary: Senility
Review: This book is more than the grocery store's blase` litany of new gizmos that has Tom Clancy's name slapped on it. So if you are intersted in a book that natters about specific weapons systems ad nauseum, you are better off shopping there or else watching the Discovery Channel. The Friedmans' book is useful because it sees technology as more than a collection of shiny and expensive toys that make loud noises; although utterly essential and often defining our ability to achieve our ends, technology is always a pillar within a grander scheme.

The value in this book is its capability to trace a concept historically, and provide us with a valuable and critical perspective of our strategic strength. Consequently we are able to analyze something transcending the, "Our ship is better than their ship," manner of thought.

So a framework of strategic thought, within which technological capability relative to others is essential for analysis, gives us insight into future needs. Whether their conclusions are valid are certainly open to debate; the approach, however, is certainly valuable.

Like, 'The Coming War With Japan,' this book is able to use multiple levels of understanding to present their arguments.......... the importance of the Friedmans' work is growing everyday. Worth the read.

Rating:
Summary: Senility
Review: This book sums up the potential of American power in the next century, such as America's current technological leadership and the headstart we already have in many fields. It makes some interesting points about the computer and it's importance in military. However, it does not take into account the coming internal stresses that America will feel. (Mainly income inequality, and possible transformation into a third-world nation) The book ignores the power of economics in the world, relying on old fasioned military might to get the job done. Because of this, I believe that the book is dead wrong about the future of America.

Rating:
Summary: A must read for any military officer
Review: This guy could be the next Clauswitz. To my knowledge, most of his theories and ideas are totally unique and represent a new field in military knowledge. The part about weapon senility is pure genius, and something anyone in a position to determine our future weapons systems MUST read. He also breaks new ground with his theories about the future of Space, long-range weapons systems, and the uselessness of nuclear weapons. This book is fascinating for anyone interested in military affairs.

Rating:
Summary: Technological Determism
Review: This is an extremely well written book on technological determism. It shows the development of weapon systems through centuries. And shows how these systems have been replaced by new technology.

Technological determism advocates that technology controls the development of society, and that this process is unstoppable. It is closely related to the school of realism.

Even if you disagree with technological determism, this book is valuable to understand how many strategists, politicians, scientists and generals do think.