A History of Warfare

Keagan fans will protest. Let them. This is a bad book. I never have understood Keegans great reputation, but I know it exists. Well, judge the book by its total failure to understand what politics are, and thus Keegans failure to understand Clauswitz dictum from the past. First, what is politics? Well, I would define politics as the struggle between competing ideas. There are other definitions. However, based on almost any definition, it is easy for me to see how Yugoslavia or the Gulf War fit within the framework written about by Clauswitz. Keegan, however, states that he does not see the connection.

Well Mr. Keegan, Yugoslavia was a war based on hatred and bigotry. The lack of success by either side doesnt deny the causes of the war. The war was and is a struggle between competing ideas. Localism vs. Internationalism or Racism v. Religous Identity. We may not like or identify with the causes of this war, but to ignore them is to ignore history. Mr. Keegan is a little bit confused by International involvement in this process. Why? Presidents and Prime Ministers often fight foreign wars to maintain domestic power. Isnt this the real reason for American involvement? And British?

But, again, my problem with this book is not its flawed reasoning, it is it boring presentation. Even a bad theory can be interesting, if presented well. Conversely, Keegan attack on Clausewitz is boring because he writing style is so stiff. If you want a good book on military theory, read something else. This book will satisfy Keegan fans, but no one else. Better luck next time.

Accordingly Germany dropped ~100,000 tons over the whole course of the war whereas by comparison, in the first four months of 1945, over 500,000 tons were dropped by the allies. Up from 650,000 tons dropped in 1944.

According to other figures ~41,000 Londoners died from German bombing. Putting this in context, Allied bombing killed 135,000 german civilians IN ONE RAID ALONE (on Dresden). Firestorms were intentionally created in the bombing of civillan areas, resulting in massive loss of German lives, with this tactic repeated in many other german cities such as Cologne and Hamburg.

Yes, German atrocities in the war were truely appalling, with the genocide of the Jews (~6 million), but are the deaths of 100,000s of civilians in individual raids alongside this not equally morally questionable? I would think so. Let us not try to deny that we also committed terrible acts, or that such acts were acceptable in the face of what the opposing side committed. I would hold that the authors view that such tactics were backward is arguably correct...