Sadly disappointing - yes many military commanders were indecisive, incompetent and stupid, but much of the content seems padded and even contrived. One good magazine article would have sufficed. ( )

This is a sad attempt to create a factoid book of military ironies. Mr. Durschmied has survived a good deal of time in dangerous places, but, alas, he's not a striking stylist, nor do I find the bulk of his book very interesting. While he has brought to my attention the "battle" of Karansebes, an Austrian Military panic in 1788 that created 10,000 casualties with out any Turkish input, another fourteen disasters follow well trodden paths and have no new information for the student. His writing does come alive for the last three chapters; the fall of the Berlin wall, the tet offensive, and his description of the first Gulf War repay the effort. Otherwise, I was bored. I note with alarm that the book has had two reprints since my 1999 copy. The readers would have been better served by reading "From The Jaws of Victory", or "The March of Folly" ( )

I read very little of this, and hadn't read enough about it to realize that it would be entirely about military history. After reading other complaints about maps and facts, it doesn't seem worth plowing through.

Here is my pet peeve that inspires me to review a book that I mostly haven't read. I was particularly irritated by his chapter on the Trojan Horse. That is a myth, and analyzing it as history is a lost cause. I decided not to read Barbara Tuchman's March of Folly because that was one of the foci of her analysis. The main problem is the supernatural element of Laocoön and his sons being strangled by sea serpents because he attempts to stop the Trojans from pulling the Horse into the city. (Durschmied omits this, although he includes other mythic elements.) This naturally terrifies the Trojans so much that they immediately drag the horse inside. The myth is thus problematic as an example of human folly or misjudgment, although perhaps a good argument for atheism.

In a sense, the prologue, about the dropping of the atom bomb on Japan is not terribly appropriate either. While it mattered very much to the citizens of the particular cities which one the atom bomb was dropped on, it didn't really make much of a difference in history. I don't think that dropping it on say, Kokura instead of Nagasaki had any effect on the outcome of the war.

Not really a coherent book. And I hated when he would show off his linguistic skills. When you are trying to make a point, and do it in a foreign language, then fail to translate it, it just comes off as showy and rude!

Glad I picked this up at a library book sale. I would have been hugely disappointed if I had spent more than a dollar on it. ( )

A great premise and a great selection of battles and major conflicts (but mostly battles; 4 1/2 stars). Crude, horribly confusing battle maps and awkward, disjointed prose. You'll get so much more from the better-written maps and articles from Wikipedia (1 star). Phony, contrived historical fiction dialogs that reminded me of those very early and poorly-funded days of the History Channel. (Remember when they'd show Pickett's Charge consisting of 6 portly 50-something re-enactors, bumbling over a split wood fence? And, they'd show some guy with a "Santy Clause" beard and gray uniform and call him General Lee? The narrative reminds me of those kind of production values - 1 1/2 stars.). Interesting obscure battles such as Tanga (1914) and interesting treatments of more well known events such as Tet. the Berlin Wall and Desert Storm (3 1/2 stars). Cryptic but interesting Bibliography (3 stars). All in all, a big amalgam of starry ambivalence. ( )