Rating: 
Summary: Profound and Timely
Review: A new book by VDH is always an interesting event. Never fearful of being controversial he is a nightmare for the Politically Correct crowd of cultural relivist historians. In "Ripples" VDH looks at three separate and distinct battles and draws fascinating conclusions from each. While not related to each other in any way, VDH shows how each has left a lasting impression on society. At Okinawa VHD shows that that desperate fanaticism that the Japanese embarked upon was truly a forelorn hope. If the 9/11 terrorists have looked to the Japanese for inspiration in sucide attacks, then they have drawn the wrong conclusions. As a result of this battle, the US determined that it must use atomic weapons against the Japanese in order to end the war swiftly and without further loss. An invasion of the Japanese mainland would have resulted in far greater loss for both sides. VHD shows us that we should feel no shame for dropping the bomb on Japan. If we are to understand why we did so one need only look at the carnage of Okinawa. If seen wthin the context of the times, the policy becomes clear. Too many revisionist historians tend to ignore that fact today. At Shiloh VHD pulls together a number of famous individuals who would have profound impact on the Civil War and its legacy in the US. Sherman, Lew Wallace, Grant and Forest all would be major players in the war, and Shiloh helped to eastablish that fact. For Sherman it was the carnage of the batttle that would define his strategy of maneauver against the South resulting in the epic March to the Sea. Forest and Wallace would leave different legacies, each of what prove fascinating to understanding the nature of late 19th century US development. The battle of Delium in 424 BC may not at first seem relivant. But the fact that Socretes was there makes for some wonderful speculation on VHD's part. If he had died how would this have chnaged Western Philosophy? Some may find this a silly point to debate, but the issue seems quite profound. Such a death would have left a big ripple indeed! The battle also shows development in Greek Hoplite warfare as Pagondas uses what would become a version of the oblique attack with his Thebans against the Athenians. Taken all together this is a fun and fascinating book. Not for the Left Wing set, although they could learn a lot from reading it! VHD shows that warfare has always been a part of humanity, and that we are niave to think we can shy away from it today. His messages has special meaning in this post-911 world.
Rating:
Summary: Profound and Timely
Review: A new book by VDH is always an interesting event. Never fearful of being controversial he is a nightmare for the Politically Correct crowd of cultural relivist historians. In "Ripples" VDH looks at three separate and distinct battles and draws fascinating conclusions from each. While not related to each other in any way, VDH shows how each has left a lasting impression on society. At Okinawa VHD shows that that desperate fanaticism that the Japanese embarked upon was truly a forelorn hope. If the 9/11 terrorists have looked to the Japanese for inspiration in sucide attacks, then they have drawn the wrong conclusions. As a result of this battle, the US determined that it must use atomic weapons against the Japanese in order to end the war swiftly and without further loss. An invasion of the Japanese mainland would have resulted in far greater loss for both sides. VHD shows us that we should feel no shame for dropping the bomb on Japan. If we are to understand why we did so one need only look at the carnage of Okinawa. If seen wthin the context of the times, the policy becomes clear. Too many revisionist historians tend to ignore that fact today. At Shiloh VHD pulls together a number of famous individuals who would have profound impact on the Civil War and its legacy in the US. Sherman, Lew Wallace, Grant and Forest all would be major players in the war, and Shiloh helped to eastablish that fact. For Sherman it was the carnage of the batttle that would define his strategy of maneauver against the South resulting in the epic March to the Sea. Forest and Wallace would leave different legacies, each of what prove fascinating to understanding the nature of late 19th century US development. The battle of Delium in 424 BC may not at first seem relivant. But the fact that Socretes was there makes for some wonderful speculation on VHD's part. If he had died how would this have chnaged Western Philosophy? Some may find this a silly point to debate, but the issue seems quite profound. Such a death would have left a big ripple indeed! The battle also shows development in Greek Hoplite warfare as Pagondas uses what would become a version of the oblique attack with his Thebans against the Athenians. Taken all together this is a fun and fascinating book. Not for the Left Wing set, although they could learn a lot from reading it! VHD shows that warfare has always been a part of humanity, and that we are niave to think we can shy away from it today. His messages has special meaning in this post-911 world.
Rating:
Summary: Profound and Timely
Review: A new book by VDH is always an interesting event. Never fearful of being controversial he is a nightmare for the Politically Correct crowd of cultural relivist historians. In "Ripples" VDH looks at three separate and distinct battles and draws fascinating conclusions from each. While not related to each other in any way, VDH shows how each has left a lasting impression on society. At Okinawa VHD shows that that desperate fanaticism that the Japanese embarked upon was truly a forelorn hope. If the 9/11 terrorists have looked to the Japanese for inspiration in sucide attacks, then they have drawn the wrong conclusions. As a result of this battle, the US determined that it must use atomic weapons against the Japanese in order to end the war swiftly and without further loss. An invasion of the Japanese mainland would have resulted in far greater loss for both sides. VHD shows us that we should feel no shame for dropping the bomb on Japan. If we are to understand why we did so one need only look at the carnage of Okinawa. If seen wthin the context of the times, the policy becomes clear. Too many revisionist historians tend to ignore that fact today. At Shiloh VHD pulls together a number of famous individuals who would have profound impact on the Civil War and its legacy in the US. Sherman, Lew Wallace, Grant and Forest all would be major players in the war, and Shiloh helped to eastablish that fact. For Sherman it was the carnage of the batttle that would define his strategy of maneauver against the South resulting in the epic March to the Sea. Forest and Wallace would leave different legacies, each of what prove fascinating to understanding the nature of late 19th century US development. The battle of Delium in 424 BC may not at first seem relivant. But the fact that Socretes was there makes for some wonderful speculation on VHD's part. If he had died how would this have chnaged Western Philosophy? Some may find this a silly point to debate, but the issue seems quite profound. Such a death would have left a big ripple indeed! The battle also shows development in Greek Hoplite warfare as Pagondas uses what would become a version of the oblique attack with his Thebans against the Athenians. Taken all together this is a fun and fascinating book. Not for the Left Wing set, although they could learn a lot from reading it! VHD shows that warfare has always been a part of humanity, and that we are niave to think we can shy away from it today. His messages has special meaning in this post-911 world.
Rating:
Summary: For the military historian
Review: As a student of military history , and part time teacher of Ancient World History I truly appreciated Mr. Hanson's work. Immediately you know that he knows what he is talking about. He uses good source material and thoroughly explains and supports his thesis.
He has enabled me to take a more broad look at not only the military aspect of culture but how it relates to a culture's social, political and economic aspects as well. One must consider all of those factors when considering why and how people fight.
Some may criticize his over emphasis on "western" ideas, but for the most part his point is hard to argue against. Free people have more to fight for and fight better. Even though battles throughout time have been lost by the west, the wars usually are not. By combining the western thought with the western military, it is no wonder why the west has been so successful in conquering and even making this world better.
I also say you need to take this book almost one battle at a time. It is not a book you can read in one sitting. I found myself finishing one battle and contemplating over the implications before going to the next one.
Kudos to Mr. Hanson.
Rating:
Summary: Ripples of Battle : How Wars of the Past Still Determine How
Review: Each human life has an impact on others, creating ripples that eventually affect future generations. Here, Hanson (classics, California State Univ., Fresno; The Western Way of War) argues that the outcomes of certain battles have had far-reaching effects on American culture. He chooses the battles of Okinawa (1945, World War II), Shiloh (1862, U.S. Civil War), and the lesser-known Delium (424 B.C.E., Peloponnesian War) and shows their impact on how Americans fight, live, and think. As Hanson explains, the chance survival of certain individuals and the death of others had repercussions reaching into the 21st century. The book is well written, and the sections on Okinawa and Shiloh are clear and easy to read. The section on Delium will challenge those not familiar with the time period, but the arguments are lucid, and Hanson convincingly demonstrates that the impact of this obscure battle is the most profound of the three. Highly recommended for public and academic libraries
Rating: 
Summary: Riding The Waves Of War
Review: Edward Shepherd Creasy's classic Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World would seem to be the prototype of this book. But Dr. Hanson's theme is more subtle than merely listing the big hinges of fate. The battles he picks caused less dramatic but still far-ranging influence on our policies and even our attitudes. It's a very interesting read, as are all of VDH's writings. I don't quite go along with some of the suppositions. Sherman's march to the sea was far from the first punitive campaign in history, though he persuades me that Shiloh caused Sherman to take up that style of war. The battle of Delium's influence must have been very subtle indeed, as the connecting thread is vanishingly faint, to my mind. Invoking a what-if influence, of Socrates possibly having been killed in that battle, is cheating; for by that standard any battle that any future famous person survived would have to count as an influential battle. The Shiloh section is best for the account of how careers were launched and scuttled, how reputations were born, and how myths were created. His description of how the savagery of the fighting on Okinawa greased the skids for the deployment of the atom bombs is well done. The Imperial Japanese expected a bloodbath, expected Okinawa to fall, but did not expect that their show of suicidal fanaticism would prompt the Americans to one-up their brutality. And that's what stopped the war and, according to Hanson, provides precedent for Americans to escalate the modern War on Terror way beyond what the jihadists bargained for. Hanson's storytelling powers and erudition are wonderfully entertaining, whether you agree with his points or not. The book's a bargain simply for the history lessons.
Rating:
Summary: Riding The Waves Of War
Review: Edward Shepherd Creasy's classic Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World would seem to be the prototype of this book. But Dr. Hanson's theme is more subtle than merely listing the big hinges of fate. The battles he picks caused less dramatic but still far-ranging influence on our policies and even our attitudes. It's a very interesting read, as are all of VDH's writings. I don't quite go along with some of the suppositions. Sherman's march to the sea was far from the first punitive campaign in history, though he persuades me that Shiloh caused Sherman to take up that style of war. The battle of Delium's influence must have been very subtle indeed, as the connecting thread is vanishingly faint, to my mind. Invoking a what-if influence, of Socrates possibly having been killed in that battle, is cheating; for by that standard any battle that any future famous person survived would have to count as an influential battle. The Shiloh section is best for the account of how careers were launched and scuttled, how reputations were born, and how myths were created. His description of how the savagery of the fighting on Okinawa greased the skids for the deployment of the atom bombs is well done. The Imperial Japanese expected a bloodbath, expected Okinawa to fall, but did not expect that their show of suicidal fanaticism would prompt the Americans to one-up their brutality. And that's what stopped the war and, according to Hanson, provides precedent for Americans to escalate the modern War on Terror way beyond what the jihadists bargained for. Hanson's storytelling powers and erudition are wonderfully entertaining, whether you agree with his points or not. The book's a bargain simply for the history lessons.
Rating:
Summary: The Impact of War
Review: Hanson argues that modern academic trends have downplayed the impact that battles have on history. With many historians now emphasizing cultural and social history and with fewer Americans having a direct experience with battle, public awareness has faded of how far-reaching has been the consequences of war. By focusing on three important battles that have been somewhat neglected, "Ripples of Battle" attempts to show that warfare is not isolated in history, but has a rippling effect that pushes out in all directions from the battlefield. Hanson uses a counterfactual approach to prove his point. What would have become of Western philosophy if Socrates had not survived at Delium? If General Albert Sidney Johnson survived at Shiloh, would the notion of the glorious lost cause have taken root in the South? Did the death of the commanding general in charge of the battle of Okinawa prevent an inquiry into the great loss of life on that island? These questions are but a few examples of what Hanson teases out of his history of three battles. I greatly enjoy Hanson's writing. He vividly describes battles and what's important about them. He has a natural sympathy for the characters of fighting men. But in "Ripples of Battle", he fails to adequately demonstrate his point. Of course, battles have ripples. But all history has ripples. And while the life and death consequences of warfare might mean the ripples of battles spread further out than those found in more mundane history, Hanson's examples do not always refer to the life and death consequences of battles. This makes it difficult to sympathize with Hanson's point. An example is the case of General Lew Wallace, who saw his young career ruined by events at Shiloh. Hanson argues that because Wallace never got over the turn his career took after the battle and felt unfairly treated, he began a new career as a novelist. He became enormously successful after writing "Ben Hur". His protagonist in the novel, like Wallace himself, was a victim of unfortunate circumstances. Hanson sees this whole train of events (and more) as stemming from a battle. But this seems like a tendentious reading of history. One could take almost any event and see ripples of this kind spreading out if one were so inclined. As descriptions of three battles, "Ripples of Battles" works; as a demonstration of the powerful impact of battle, it falls short. Hanson is right that for those families who lose loved ones, the ripples of battles are among the most powerful eddies in history. But, for other cases, he doesn't show them to be any more powerful than other events in history
Rating:
Summary: The Impact of War
Review: Hanson argues that modern academic trends have downplayed the impact that battles have on history. With many historians now emphasizing cultural and social history and with fewer Americans having a direct experience with battle, public awareness has faded of how far-reaching has been the consequences of war. By focusing on three important battles that have been somewhat neglected, "Ripples of Battle" attempts to show that warfare is not isolated in history, but has a rippling effect that pushes out in all directions from the battlefield. Hanson uses a counterfactual approach to prove his point. What would have become of Western philosophy if Socrates had not survived at Delium? If General Albert Sidney Johnson survived at Shiloh, would the notion of the glorious lost cause have taken root in the South? Did the death of the commanding general in charge of the battle of Okinawa prevent an inquiry into the great loss of life on that island? These questions are but a few examples of what Hanson teases out of his history of three battles. I greatly enjoy Hanson's writing. He vividly describes battles and what's important about them. He has a natural sympathy for the characters of fighting men. But in "Ripples of Battle", he fails to adequately demonstrate his point. Of course, battles have ripples. But all history has ripples. And while the life and death consequences of warfare might mean the ripples of battles spread further out than those found in more mundane history, Hanson's examples do not always refer to the life and death consequences of battles. This makes it difficult to sympathize with Hanson's point. An example is the case of General Lew Wallace, who saw his young career ruined by events at Shiloh. Hanson argues that because Wallace never got over the turn his career took after the battle and felt unfairly treated, he began a new career as a novelist. He became enormously successful after writing "Ben Hur". His protagonist in the novel, like Wallace himself, was a victim of unfortunate circumstances. Hanson sees this whole train of events (and more) as stemming from a battle. But this seems like a tendentious reading of history. One could take almost any event and see ripples of this kind spreading out if one were so inclined. As descriptions of three battles, "Ripples of Battles" works; as a demonstration of the powerful impact of battle, it falls short. Hanson is right that for those families who lose loved ones, the ripples of battles are among the most powerful eddies in history. But, for other cases, he doesn't show them to be any more powerful than other events in history
Rating:
Summary: What If?
Review: Hanson is an excellent writer with a vigorous style, and "Ripples of Battle" is a pleasure to read. The book explores the "ripples" that flowed from three battles--Okinawa, Shiloh, and Delium--and explains how those ripples changed the world. Human history would have been very different had the Greek philosopher Socrates been killed at the otherwise obscure Battle of Delium in 424 BC. At the time, Socrates' most profound thinking was yet to come and Plato was only a child. If Socrates had fallen along with hundreds of other Athenians, "the entire course of Western philosophical and political thought would have been radically altered" (216). The Battle of Shiloh was likewise a crack in time. Among other things, the fighting changed William Tecumseh Sherman from a failure to a hero and taught him that it was far less costly to wage war against civilian infrastructure than to fight a pitched battle against a modern army. The March to the Sea began with the hard lessons that Sherman learned at Shiloh. And at Okinawa, America learned how difficult it would be to force Japan to surrender, enduring fanatical resistance and suicidal attacks that cost the lives of thousands Americans and tens of thousands of Japanese. Hanson argues that the experience yielded a cold American resolve and a willingness to use atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Whether you agree with Hanson's conclusions or not, the journey is worth the price of admission. History is often written is if key outcomes were inevitable, as if Socrates were ordained to lay the foundations of western philosphy or the north were bound to win the Civil War. But history is contingent, and the only way to fully appreciate the significance of a given occurrence--especially the "near run things" that crop up in battle--is to think about what might have happened if the event had turned out differently. In this respect, Hanson's book bears a kinship to the "What If? series of essay collections--in fact, Hanson's original essays on Delium and the fate of Lew Wallace after Shiloh can be found in those books. Of course, the biggest ripples that flow from these battles might be those that remain unseen. We know that Socrates did not die at Delium and that the intellectual world as we know it depended on his survival--but we don't know whether Delium, or Shiloh, or Okinawa or any other event or battle ended the lives of other geniuses who might have changed history, for better or worse. Those imponderables are left to more speculative works than this.
| 
