A Mais Breve História da Guerra

Shortest History

by Gwynne Dyer

Milhares de anos, milhões de conflitos.

A Mais Breve História da Guerra em 240 páginas.

A guerra mudou, sim, mas nós, humanos, não. Desde os nossos ancestrais, os caçadores- recoletores, até uma das mais mortíferas armas da era moderna, o nuclear, sempre que os recursos mais preciosos foram alvo de disputa, entrámos em guerra. Pela mão do aclamado historiador Gwynne Dyer, aqui encontramos o início dos conflitos, na pré-história, e vamos até à criação das primeiras cidades do mundo; depois, vemos desfilar as batalhas daquele tempo em que as armas de fogo ainda não tinham sido criadas - para mudarem a guerra para sempre; do século XVIII, em que o conceito de guerra limitada havia de acabar, partimos rumo à guerra total e ao cenário de devastação que veríamos com Hiroxima e o nuclear.

Mas, da Guerra Fria à invasão da Ucrânia pela Rússia, que quebrou o mais longo período de paz entre as grandes potências desde a Segunda Guerra Mundial, que lastro e que futuro, inundado por tecnologia, crise climática e informação global, nos espera? Recorrendo à antropologia, à psicologia e a outras ciências, o autor oferece-nos uma história para todos quantos querem entender o papel da guerra na história da humanidade - e como podemos tentar que ela não defina o nosso futuro.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, War, Politics, Military Fiction, Military History, World History

240 pages, Paperback

Published July 1, 2023

About the author

Gwynne Dyer, OC is a London-based independent Canadian journalist, syndicated columnist and military historian.

Dyer was born in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador (then the Dominion of Newfoundland) and joined the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve at the age of sixteen. While still in the naval reserve, he obtained a BA in history from Memorial University of Newfoundland in 1963; an MA in military history from Rice University in Houston, Texas, in 1966; and a PhD in military and Middle Eastern history at King's College London in 1973. Dyer served in the Canadian, American and British naval reserves. He was employed as a senior lecturer in war studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, 1973–77. In 1973 he began writing articles for leading London newspapers on the Arab-Israeli conflict, and soon decided to abandon academic life for a full-time career in journalism. In 2010, he was appointed an Officer of the Order of Canada.

Reviews

[Maziyar Yf · Rating 4 out of 5]

تاریخ فشرده جنگ نوشتهٔ گوئین دایر، نویسنده و روزنامه‌نگار کانادایی، بررسی جامع و مختصری از تاریخ جنگ از دوران شکارچی-گردآورنده تا عصر ابرقدرت‌های هسته‌ای است. دایر با نگاهی تحلیلی و تاریخی، به بررسی عوامل مؤثر در بروز جنگ‌ها، مانند عوامل سیاسی، اقتصادی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی پرداخته. او همچنین تأثیر جنگ‌ها بر جوامع و فرهنگ‌ها را شرح داده و به این سوال پاسخ می‌دهد که چرا جنگ‌ها در طول تاریخ بشر همواره تکرار شده‌اند.
دایر در این کتاب از منابع متنوعی استفاده کرده و با زبانی ساده و روان، تاریخ جنگ را به گونه‌ای روایت کرده که برای مخاطبان عام نیز قابل فهم باشد. او همچنین با ارائهٔ مثال‌های متعدد از جنگ‌های مختلف در طول تاریخ، به خواننده کمک می‌کند تا درک بهتری از عوامل مؤثر در بروز جنگ‌ها پیدا کند.
دائر کتاب خود را با خاستگاه ها یا بررسی ریشه‌های جنگ در دوران‌های اولیه زندگی بشر، یعنی دوران شکارچی-گردآورنده، شروع کرده . او شرح داده که چگونه رقابت بر سر منابع و قلمرو، زمینه‌ساز بروز اولین درگیری‌ها بین گروه‌های انسانی شد . راه و رسم نبرد ، فصل دوم ، نویسنده به بررسی تحولات فنون و تاکتیک‌های جنگی در طول تاریخ پرداخته. از سلاح‌های اولیه مانند نیزه و سنگ گرفته تا سلاح‌های پیشرفته‌تر مانند شمشیر و زره، نویسنده به سیر تکاملی ابزار جنگی اشاره کرده. در فصل بعدی ، نویسنده به بررسی جنگ در دوران باستان و ظهور تمدن‌های اولیه و تأثیرات کشاورزی و شهرنشینی بر جنگ اشاره کرده است .
دائر سپس به بررسی جنگ در دوران کلاسیک، یعنی دوران یونان و روم باستان ، تاکتیک‌های نظامی، استراتژی‌ها و جنگ‌های مهم این دوره و تأثیرات جنگ بر جوامع کلاسیک، از جمله تأثیرات سیاسی، اقتصادی و اجتماعی، پرداخته. او توضیح می‌دهد که چگونه جنگ‌ها به شکل‌گیری دولت‌های کلاسیک و فرهنگ‌های آن‌ها کمک کردند.
فصل «سلطنت‌های مطلقه و جنگ محدود (۱۷۹۰- ۱۴۰۰) به بررسی جنگ در دوران قرون وسطی و ظهور سلطنت‌های مطلقه مربوط است . دایر ویژگی‌های جنگ در این دوره، مانند استفاده از شوالیه‌ها، قلعه‌ها و محاصره‌ها را بررسی کرده و نشان داده که چگونه جنگ‌ها در این دوره، اغلب محدود و محلی بودند. با ظهور سلطنت های مطلقه در انگلستان و فرانسه ، نویسنده توضیح داده که چگونه این سلطنت‌ها، با ایجاد ارتش‌های دائمی و بوروکراسی‌های متمرکز، قدرت خود را افزایش دادند .
در فصل جنگ افروزی (۱۹۰۰ - ۱۷۹۰) ، دایر، به بررسی تحولات جنگ در دورهٔ زمانی بین انقلاب فرانسه و آغاز قرن بیستم پرداخته. این دوره، شاهد تغییرات شگرفی در فنون نظامی، استراتژی‌ها و ماهیت جنگ‌ها مانند انقلاب فرانسه و ظهور ناپلئون بود.
انقلاب فرانسه و جنگ‌های ناپلئونی را باید نقطهٔ عطفی در تاریخ جنگ دانست که سبب پررنگ شدن نقش ایدئولوژی، ملی‌گرایی و بسیج عمومی شد. هم چنین انقلاب صنعتی، تأثیر عمیقی بر فنون نظامی و ماهیت جنگ‌ها گذاشت. دایر نقش سلاح‌های جدید، مانند توپ‌های دوربرد و مسلسل‌ها، در تغییر میدان نبرد و تأثیر راه‌آهن و کشتی‌های بخار در جابجایی سریع نیروها و تجهیزات را بیان کرده است .
نویسنده در فصل جنگ تمام عیار به بررسی دو جنگ جهانی پرداخته که نقطه عطف دیگری در تاریخ بشر بودند. جنگ جهانی اول با رقابت‌های استعماری و ملی‌گرایی افراطی آغاز شد و با استفاده از سلاح‌های جدید و سنگرها، به جنگی فرسایشی و خونین تبدیل شد. جنگ جهانی دوم، ناشی از پیامدهای جنگ اول، ظهور نازیسم و فاشیسم، و سیاست‌های توسعه‌طلبانه آلمان و ژاپن و ایتالیا ، به جنگی گسترده‌تر و ویرانگرتر تبدیل شد. این جنگ‌ها، با استفاده از تمام ظرفیت‌های صنعتی و علمی، و هدف قرار دادن غیرنظامیان، به جنگ‌هایی تمام عیار تبدیل شدند که تأثیرات مخربی بر جوامع بشری داشتند و عصر هسته‌ای را رقم زدند.
دائر سپس به بررسی ظهور و گسترش سلاح‌های هسته‌ای و تأثیر آن‌ها بر روابط بین‌الملل پرداخته. این دوره با پایان جنگ جهانی دوم و استفاده از بمب‌های اتمی توسط آمریکا علیه ژاپن آغاز شد. سپس، با آغاز جنگ سرد، جهان شاهد رقابت تسلیحاتی هسته‌ای بین آمریکا و شوروی بود که جهان را در آستانهٔ نابودی قرار داد. در ادامه دایر نقش بازدارندگی هسته‌ای، پیمان‌های محدودسازی تسلیحات و تلاش‌های بین‌المللی برای جلوگیری از گسترش سلاح‌های هسته‌ای را بررسی کرده. او همچنین به این موضوع اشاره کرده که چگونه تهدید جنگ هسته‌ای، سیاست بین‌الملل و امنیت جهانی را تغییر داد.
نویسنده در پایان به بررسی ماهیت جنگ در عصر حاضر پرداخته. او معتقد است که جنگ در عصر حاضر، به سه شکل اصلی ظاهر می‌شود: جنگ‌های هسته‌ای، جنگ‌های سنتی و جنگ‌های تروریستی. جنگ‌های هسته‌ای، با تهدید نابودی کامل، همچنان یکی از بزرگ‌ترین خطرات برای بشریت هستند. جنگ‌های سنتی، با استفاده از ارتش‌های منظم و سلاح‌های متعارف، همچنان در مناطق مختلف جهان رخ می‌دهند. جنگ‌های تروریستی، با استفاده از تاکتیک‌های نامتقارن و هدف قرار دادن غیرنظامیان، چالشی جدید برای امنیت جهانی هستند. این فصل، به بررسی تعامل بین این سه شکل جنگ و تأثیر آن‌ها بر امنیت جهانی پرداخته .
دایر در این کتاب یادآوری می‌کند که جنگ، با وجود تمام پیشرفت‌های تکنولوژیک و تغییرات اجتماعی، همچنان بخشی از تاریخ بشر بوده و هست. او نشان می‌دهد که چگونه جنگ‌ها در طول تاریخ، جوامع را شکل داده‌اند، فرهنگ‌ها را تحت تأثیر قرار داده‌اند، و سرنوشت ملت‌ها را رقم زده‌اند.
با این حال، دایر در پایان کتاب، به این نکتهٔ امیدوارکننده اشاره می‌کند که جنگ، سرنوشت محتوم بشر نیست. او معتقد است که با درک بهتر عوامل مؤثر در بروز جنگ‌ها و تلاش برای حل اختلافات از طریق گفتگو و همکاری، می‌توان به آینده‌ای صلح‌آمیزتر دست یافت.

[Julian Worker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gwynne Dyer is a superb writer and I feel tremendously informed after reading his work. It's no different with this superb book on the history of warfare in terms of tactics, technology, and manpower.

If you're expecting to read about famous battles through the ages such as Issus, Manzikert, Blenheim, and The Somme then this is not the book for you.

This book discusses how weapons influence the tactics of commanders, how the roles of soldiers have changed, and how technology has lead us to the brink of a war that would end civilisation. The book discusses the role of war in the evolution of humanity and how conflict has been created by anthropology and psychology in the past and will be created in the future by climate change and resource shortages.

Interspersed with the text are quotes from various figures throughout history and simple diagrams that explain some of the concepts that cause conflict.

The effects of warfare on civilians are discussed with some horrific statistics about how many people were killed by firestorms in Hamburg in July 1943 and the number of casualties inflicted by US drone strikes since 2001. Drones are now the aerial threat of choice with the USA training more people to fly drones than are being trained to fly fighters and bombers. Drones destroyed almost half of Armenia's armed forces in its 2020 war with Azerbaijan. Drones are relatively cheap to fly and allow smaller contries to inflict damage on larger invading forces.

Finally, the book finishes with comments on Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The biggest danger is that if Russia succeeds in taking some parts of Ukraine then the largely successful post-1945 ban on changing a country's borders by military force disappears. This ban was a founding principle of the United Nations and any successful overthrow of the ban weakens the United Nations and the fragile peace that has existed globally for most of the period since 1945.

Yes, we are in trouble and perhaps the answer is for us to all get along better for more of the time. If the Forest Troop of baboons in Kenya can change their ways, so can we.

[Morgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

bit eurocentric, I would've loved to hear moe about warfare development in maybe Africa or South America, but I got through this within four days which is very fast for nonfiction for me so yes I enjoyed it very much

[Markus Hachenberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sehr spannend und interessant. Nicht sonderlich tiefgründig aber extrem gut lesbar. Das war endlich Mal wieder ein Buch, was ich gar nicht weglegen wollte. Hab's auf Englisch gelesen. Ist aber super leicht geschrieben.
Es ist leider sehr eurozentrisch. Der Blick wird selten mal nach Asien oder Afrika gerichtet.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good overview of the history war, what causes it, and what it would take to end it forever. The book includes some great research on how, historically, a surprising number soldiers have been gone to great lengths to avoid killing, even in the heat of battle. However, as modern weapons systems make killing more remote and less personal, the willingness to use lethal force has gone up. The final chapter about how to end war permanently was especially interesting. A more robust international system with a strengthened UN is the first step needed to bring warfare to an end. Sadly, few powerful nations would currently be willing to surrender some of their sovereignty to a stronger UN. Overall, this book is worth a read for a good introduction to military history.

[David Andrews · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting read with some thought-provoking points. But over all it is written with the mindset that we can somehow rid ourselves of evil or at least put people in global power who will control it. History doesn’t agree. I do not mean to say that the author is entirely naive, as she does correctly point out issues with, for example, the permanent members of the UN Security Council. But the objective of the book is to express that, somehow, a miracle needs to occur, and we form one global government with absolute power, and that will go well.

[Emerson Stokes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well, this book is conflicting for me.

It’s less of a short history of war and more of the author’s interpretation of war throughout the ages in order to give context for his later arguments concerning the future of war (and why it should end). The author makes an interesting argument but I feel as though more context and evidence is needed for the massive point he’s trying to make about war throughout the ages.

Overall, don’t read this book expecting a history of war, it’s more about the fundamentals and future of war if anything.

[Daniel Kukwa · Rating 4 out of 5]

An easy-to-read yet informative one stop shop for the history of warfare. This is one of those books that makes for a great historical ready...and it also provides a new teaching tool for my arsenal.

[Ben · Rating 4 out of 5]

War, What Is It Good For?

This was a pretty interesting book.

Quite honestly, it was a lot better than other recent history books I have read.

I still can't say I love history books or war books, but at least this book was brief.
About all you need to read about war history right here!

Also, this was a great book to read on Remembrance Day - as to why I read it.

3.8/5

[Benjamin Wiley · Rating 3 out of 5]

Enjoyable, especially interesting regarding early conflict and wars. Nuclear war section was insightful as well, and a reminder that it still hangs over our head. But in general was quite short and simplified. Guess it did what it said on the tin, but I was left wanting a bit more.

[Jesse · Rating 4 out of 5]

Delivers exactly what if promises gives a concise history of war. I do like the glass half full perspective offered on the utility of the UN.

[Orrezz · Rating 3 out of 5]

יש פה כמה נקודות מעניינות, אם כי כדי להגיע אליהן צריך לצלוח הקדמה אקדמית ומנומנמת יחסית וגם טענות לא נורא מגובות היסטורית או אקטואלית. אולי נצמדו כאן יותר למניפסט מאשר להיסטוריה בגלל קוצר היריעה.

[Florence Hull · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very nuanced and relevant book. Easy read but becomes a bit hasty at the conclusion. I would highly recommend it as an introductory reading.

[Brett DesRoche · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very fascinating book! Couldn’t put it down

[Alicia · Rating 3 out of 5]

First for the positive portion of my review, to perhaps soften the criticism that follows (although I must note early on, I did not dislike this book whatever my problem with it may have been). It is easy to read; has a good flow; incorporates images, photographs, and flow charts very effectively; and the chapters were well split. It also has a good balance in discussing weaponry/technological improvements and their implications as well as discussing social factors of war.

But I have a few things to nitpick regarding the content, the meat of the argument if you will. To start, it is very very eurocentric.I know it’s supposed to be short but that is little excuse for the incredibly influential history of warfare excluded in this book. War in Asia is only covered in a bit of speculation on the very earliest civilizations along the fertile crescent and then of course The Second World War and the infamous nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There is not a single mention of Alexander the Great, the Mongol Empire, the Chinese Dynasties, India, the Russo-Japanese War, and but a mention in a sentence of the Sino-Japanese War despite all of these being rather important to the history of warfare. Even a book wanting to be the “shortest” on the subject could have at least done these events the courtesy of a cursory acknowledgment.

Likewise war in Africa is reduced to a mention of the Egyptians fighting the Hittites and the Boer War is mentioned in passing in a sentence despite its arguable importance to warfare in the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries. Even the Americas are neglected. There is a very brief section on the American Civil War but it could have been fleshed out a little better and while the French Revolution has a section the American Revolution that preceded this is not even mentioned. South America is of course not mentioned, but there I will concede it hasn’t been the biggest player on the world stage, although a mention of the Civil Wars when the related topic for European countries came up may have helped to flesh out his arguments there.

It is of course meant to be a short book and I recognize that much must be left out in a topic so broad and expansive one could dedicate their life to its study and barely cover half the details. My point is only that for a book claiming to tell the story of war and thereby the story of “us” (humankind) it focuses almost entirely on one particular continent and would really more aptly be entitled “The shortest History of War in the West" or even more aptly, "The Shortest History of War as Concerns the Development of Europe."

Dyer also spends perhaps a bit too much of the latter half of the book on nuclear war (or more accurately, the threat of it). Given the amount of space dedicated to the rest of history and the many instances listed that did not so much as garner a sympathetic mention, Dyer could well have sacrificed some of the speculation about World War Three and nuclear-winter-armageddon in favour of including some more actual historical battlefields. Speculation about the future may well be for the journalists but it is all but forbidden to the historian.

Dyer also took an interesting stance in using this book to highlight the differences between how war was waged by societies in which egalitarianism and equality were valued and how it was waged by those with a top-down, what the author deems “anthill” structures. While he does make important points about how it is societies that wage war and so to understand war we must understand the society which wages it (esteemed military historian Sir Michael Howard would certainly have agreed), Dyer takes quite a bit of liberty in inferring what certain societies must have valued.

Again, I understand it is meant to be a short book which does not allow for in depth discussion of all or even part of any available source material—but I saw no evidence given for his continued claim that hunter gatherer societies were all highly equal and egalitarian. Most such societies left behind little evidence for us to draw on, certainly nothing in written form, and so Dyer’s evidence seems to be mainly what we know of from the few hunter gatherer tribes still around today or from written sources published by outsiders observing such societies in recent memory. It may give us some idea of what war could have been like in prehistoric times but to assume it was the same or even at all similar is shaky speculation at best.

Still, I find this book is a very good and readable introduction for those more casually interested in history and the subject of war. Those engaged in studies on military history or history more generally will see the failings of this book more easily (or disagree with my criticisms entirely) but will, I think, still find it enjoyable nonetheless.

[Hashim Al-Jazzaf · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب ممتع جداً، عن تاريخ الحروب منذ القدم، متضمناً تطور أساليب وتكتيكات المعارك والأسلحة المستخدمة، أنظمة الحكم وتأثيرها على طرق الحروب، تاريخ مراكز القوى في العالم مع تركيز على حروب القرن العشرين والنظام الجديد في العالم.
أهم ما يتضمّن الكتاب :
* أصل الحروب: هل شن الحروب جزء من طبيعة البشر؟ أم أنه مرادف للحضارة البشرية ووليدها كما يقول جان جاك روسو؟
* ما دلت عليه دراسات أجريت حول مجتمعات منعزلة عن الحضارة في البرازيل وأستراليا، ومراقبة أقربائنا الشمبانزي ودراسات لآثار الأنواع القريبة منا من أشباه البشر المنقرضين.
* الانتقال من حكم المستبد المطلق إلى التعاون والتمرد على المستبد لفرض المساواة.
* عن المعركة نفسها، الجنود والضباط، نسب الوفيات والإصابات، الانهيار النفسي ومتى يبدأ، خط زمني للحالة النفسية للجندي.
* الدافع والرغبة بقتل العدو.
* المسافة بين المقاتل والعدو وتأثيرها على سهولة قرار القتل والرغبة بالقتل.
* القتال عن بُعد (مشغلو الدرونات) وتأثيره على الحالة النفسية للمقاتل.
* الروبوتات القاتلة.
* المعارك ٣٥٠٠ - ١٥٠٠ قبل الميلاد
* أريحا: أول مدينة مسوّرة
* المعارك الأولى والغارات التي شنها الرعاة الرحل على المزارعين.
* مقارنة بين حروب ومقاتلي وعتاد المدن الصغيرة والمدن الكبيرة.
* استخدام الخيول والعربات وغزو الهندو أوروبيين.
* الحروب الكلاسيكية (١٥٠٠ ق.م - ١٤٠٠ ب.م)
* التشكيل العسكري التكتيكي (phalanx) الذي استقرت عليه المعارك حتى ظهور الأسلحة النارية.
* جنود المشاة أهميتهم أكبر من الفرسان. فالفرسان أهميتهم للاستكشاف وقتل الجنود المهزومين عند فرارهم.
* الالتزام العسكري والحالة المعنوية يفوقان العدد أهمية. (الاسكندر ضد الفرس مثالاً)
* الحروب البحرية (اليونان والفرس - الرومان وقرطاجة).
* الكتائب والمشاة: هيئات مختلفة لجنود المعارك.
* الاعتماد على جند المشاة مجدداً في القرن ١٦ ليعود الوضع مشابها لما قبل ٤٠٠٠ سنة.
* اختراع البارود في الصين (القرن ١١)
* استخدام البارود لصناعة الأسلحة النارية في القرن ١٢ (في الحصارات غالباً لا في الحروب) من قبل الامبراطورية العثمانية وأوروبا.
* استخدام البندقية كسلاح رئيسي في الحروب ابتداء من القرن ١٧.
* مبدأ الحرب المحدودة ١٦٤٨-١٧٨٩ حيث يكون الضحايا محصورين في الجنود، والشعوب لا تعاني كثيراً وتستمر الحياة شبه طبيعية في المدن.
* الثورة الفرنسية، الحس الوطني الثوري، وأثره في توسع مدى الحروب "الحرب الجماعية".
* مقارنة بين المملكات التقليدية والنظام الثوري الشعبي.
* حروب نابليون.
* كيف أدت الطباعة إلى تغير لعبة الحروب؟
* التجنيد الإجباري: بين الإلغاء وإعادة الفرض
* الحرب الأهلية الأمريكية: التحصن، وأول استخدام للتكنولوجيا (القطارات) لنقل الجنود، والتلغراف لتنسيق التحركات، وانطلاقة الحروب الاقتصادية التي تطال جميع السكان.
* الحرب الشاملة.
* كان الاعتقاد السائد أن معركة استباقية صغيرة يمكن أن تنهي الحرب قبل أن تبدأ.
* هذا الاعتقاد ثبت خطأه في الحرب العالمية الأولى.
* انقسام أوروبا إلى قسمين من خلال اتفاقيات ومعاهدات مبدأها حصيف ولكن خلافاً بسيطاً بين دولتين أدى إلى حرب عالمية.
* الوضع الجديد للمقاتل: الاختباء في الخنادق، على مقربة شديدة من العدو طوال الوقت.
* حروب الاستنزاف.
* الدبابات في الحرب العالمية الأولى.
* في هذه الحرب سقطت أنظمة وعانى المدنيون وليس الجنود فقط.
* الحروب الخاطفة (الألمان في الحرب العالمية الثانية).
* قصف الطائرات على المدن في الحرب العالمية الثانية.
* تصميم الطائرات كان للقتال الجوي ولم يكن كافياً لإيقاف الحرب، رغم كل الأرواح والدمار الذي خلفته.
* الحرب النووية.
* التسلح لهدف الردع.
* هل تهم زيادة كمية التسلح النووي ما دامت الكمية كافية للرد؟
* السياسات النووية المختلفة (الكمية، الأهداف، والخطط).
* الشتاء النووي العالمي.
* أزمة الصواريخ في كوبا ومشارف الحرب العالمية الثالثة.
* هل الحرب النووية المحدودة ممكنة؟

* الآثار الجيولوجية والبيولوجية الكارثية للحرب النووية على الأرض.
* ثلاثة أنواع من الحروب المعاصرة: النووية، التقليدية، الإرهاب.
* روسيا والناتو.
* حروب الغوريلا (جماعات مسلحة لا تقاتل على أرض المعركة): الهدف منها ليس الانتصار في المعركة ولكن جعل الاحتلال مكلفاً جداً على المحتل.
* متى ينتصر محاربو الغوريلا ومتى لا ينتصرون؟
* قصص نجاح وفشل (خاصة في أمريكا الجنوبية)
* منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية.
* الهدف من الهجمات الإرهابية (القاعدة).
* أحادية سيطرة أمريكا على العالم.
* حروب متوقعة مع ظهور نتائج التغير المناخي.
* صعود قوى عظمى جديدة.
* سباق التسلح النووي.
* الأمم المتحدة ومجلس الأمن.
* جرائم الحرب ومصداقية تطبيق عقوباتها.
* حتى يكون للأمم المتحدة سلطة، يجب على الدول أن تعطيها صلاحيات وتتنازل عن بعض سلطتها.
* هل هناك أمل لوضع حد للحروب في العالم؟ وأين يكمن هذا الأمل؟

[Freido · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very fair book that I believe covers the dynamic of war very well. It often shows arguments and counter-arguments, and that's always a good sign. It's not technical about military technology, but for what it is, that being big picture ideas on the evolution of war, you really couldn't cram much more in this 270 or so page book.

[Nadja B · Rating 3 out of 5]

Insightful and straightforward book that explains the origins and development of wars and military strategy through history. On the other hand, the writing is sometimes simplistic and makes oversights when it comes to modern conventional warfare. How can a book that came out in 2021 overlook Russian expansionism, Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, Yemen, and basically reduce the Palestinian struggle to a PR stunt? Also, the casual use of the term “third world countries” and accepting the lethal conflicts in Africa and the Middle East as business as usual, betrays the author’s eurocentric views where white Western lives are really what matters. On a positive note, I like that the author included a brief analysis of the very real consequences of global warming on future conflicts, as well as the horrors of mutually assured nuclear destruction (that one paragraph about how a terrorist nuclear attack on one major city would be no big deal was kind of bizarre). In any case, thought provoking and informative.

[Frank Beijen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book, but not as complete as I hoped it to be. Gwynne Dyer's scope of history is outdated: he focuses on Mesopotamian civilizations, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans, switching over to Western Europe in Medieval times and to North America later on. What were armed conflicts like in Africa, India, China, Japan and South America? The author either doesn't know or doesn't care. A book containing more than 250 pages shouldn't be too short to offer some insights about the history of war in these areas in the world.

[Ian · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is my fourth Gwynne Dyer book. This is book about how war as a whole works. It is not a military history in the usual sense. Rather it explains how war is ingrained into us right from when we were hunter-gathers all the way to current history. In fact, the Coda at the end states that this was being written in March 2022 just weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine. So it is quite up-to-date with current events. One might even say prescient in his predictions. I have always found his books and television series excellent. This is worth the read if your interest lies with war and conflicts.

[Toby Newton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Highly effective balance between brevity and authority. I’d have welcomed a bit more on regions other than Europe and the USA. Overall, though, this is a rightly weary and clear-eyed review of humankind’s enthralment to those who, for one reason or another, profit from dealing in death.

[Dovide · Rating 4 out of 5]

Incredibly insightful and brilliantly written. I really learned a lot from this book.

[Sai Krishna · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is said that we live in the most peaceful period of human history. The cloud of war is thinner for this generation and this often leads to taking the status-quo as granted and default. This thin cloud also kept bursting off late. Starting from the Ukraine-Russia war, this decade saw resurgence of armed conflict between states like Armenia-Azerbaijan, Israel-Palestine, India-Pakistan, not withstanding various other skirmishes. In this context, this book helped me explain War: its origins and utility to mankind.

The author spent a lot of time in dotting origins of war, not just in humans. Author detailed instances of wars from Chimps, Homo erectus, hunter gatherer societies to the present day marking the continuing relevance of this act. The reasons would vary. It could be for the female sex, for resources, for price, for equality and justice. War remained a dominant part of history.

There is also good discussion on the inner world of a soldier. Their psychology, how they find purpose and mental breakdowns is well discussed. This also changes with the changing techniques of warfare. Are drone pilots soldiers as they do not risk their lives?

The later part of the book excelled in reasoning modern warfare which includes nuclear wars, guerilla war fare. The last 50 pages is an absolute page turner. Probably because these events are also relatable.

One major complaint is that the book is Eurocentric. The mid section of the book spent inordinate focus on wars in ancient and medieval Europe; as if rest of the world was a peace haven. The modern events are also Europe/America centric. Other conflicts are only discussed peripherally.

Some notes from the book:

1. It is the unlimited liability of a soldier that lends dignity to the military profession. No other profession obliges employee to laydown life when needed. This also brings in hierarchy in dignity with respect to drone operators, and people engaged in cyber warfare.

2. Military action is primarily group action. Group coherence, loyalty, sticking to rules is important to work for a victory. Imagine a phalanx in which individuals think atomistically? That'd be a disaster!

3. As the distance between trigger finger and the target increases, the reluctancy to kill reduces. "At that distance, they looked like Ants", said a 20 year old soldier Hein Severloh who killed about 2000 American troops in Normandy in 1944 by continously firing a machine gun for 9 hours. When he later killed a soldier at close distance with a rifle, that visual disturbed him for life. Severloh's distance was just 500 meters. Now imagine the distance between a drone operator/ missile operator and its targets.

4. However, Drone operators also feel psychological distress when they observe their targets (& their families) for long period of time. They develop something called "cognitive combat intimacy".

5. The job of military today is to avert a war, not fight one. Because fighting a war today would lead to a nuclear disaster. Under the Nuclear deterrence theory, the military operations in peacetime should thus focus on ensuring a credible nuclear retaliation when attacked. And so they hide the nuclear bombs at various places, undergrounds, submarines etc.

6. "Strategists discussing nuclear bombs are like virgins discussing sex."

7. It is harder to obtain a decisive victory in today's conflicts. As a result wars drag on and goes on to economic warfare targetting whole populations. Mass deaths and civilian suffering due to wars are thus a consequence.

8. Conventional wars reduced, but guerilla wars increased.

9. Rural guerilla actions worked against colonisers, against the USA in Vietnam. By imposing limited but sustained costs on the foreign occupier, they kill the will of the foreigner and force them to leave. One can account Taliban's victory against the USA in Afghanistan in this.

10. Rural guerilla actions rarely worked against a local government. With only exception of Mao in China. However, he could convert his guerilla action into mass action (PLA). Fidel Castro and Sandinistas (Nicaragua) was also successful, but they had some anti-America sentiment to exploit. Mao's success remains an inspiration to many Guerilla wars today.

11. The strategy of Guerillas against local governments thus changed. They follow "La Politique Du Pire" (the strategy of making things worse) - a strategy advocated by French Marxists. They commit violence to provoke the regime into taking repressive measures that would alienate local population. They bank on the alienated local population to join their ranks and make it a mass action (just like Mao did). Islamic terrorism follows this (al Qaeda's twin tower attack was to provoke American repression). This strategy did work in episodes, but never in full the way Mao could make it work. Disappointed, there are lone wolf attacks by a few disenchanted radicalised members.

12. Climate change, nuclear proliferation and rise of new powers are three main threats that could cause the next war.

13. Within a society/community/nation, we live by an assumption that we need not kill each other when we quarrel. We accept rights to everyone in our community. Over the history we kept expanding the size of this community - from tribes .. castes.. to nations today. War can only be ended when we can expand this "community" to include all of humankind.

[Nigel Kotani · Rating 4 out of 5]

I downloaded a sample of this book out of curiosity after I finished The Shortest History of England, because I wondered whether the Shortest History series might work better on a global theme than a local history. By the time I finished the sample, I was hooked.

The book starts with a high-level analysis of what combat is, beginning with the change in the human condition from egalitarian hunter-gatherers to agriculturalists who needed to protect what they had accumulated from marauding hunter-gatherers and pastoralists. To protect the collective, structure was needed, and with structure came hierarchy.

This is an author who really knows how to present an argument. He explains, for example, that the military’s rigid discipline and adherence to apparently arbitrary ways of operating, which seem so bizarre to the general populace, only seem bizarre because peace is not their true working environment. In combat, this way of operating reduces the unpredictability of what is essentially a chaotic situation. In a particularly chilling quote from a WWII infantry officer he also explains the separation between officers and men: private soldiers are simply material, and material occasionally has to get used up by those in control, being the officers. The corollary to that last point is a psychological investigation carried out during World War II which found that most soldiers had become convinced of the inevitability of their death and had stopped believing that their skill or courage made any difference, a finding once echoed to me by a flatmate who had served in the US Army in Vietnam.

About a quarter of the way into the book he moves from theory into the beginnings of ancient combat, covering early infantry, the changes which came about with the invention of the composite bow and the chariot, the introduction of cavalry, the return to infantry again and then the game-changer: the invention of firearms and the cannon. That for me was the weakest part of the book, though only because of its relative inaccessibility after the timeless analysis with which the book began.

With the analysis of the 20th century and beyond, the second half of the book is much more accessible than the second quarter, dealing as it does with a period with which we have far more connection and which therefore has more relevance to us. His analysis of the Cold War, nuclear proliferation, the growth of terrorism and the emergence of the UN are as political as they are military. Indeed, if you’re interested in politics, this is a highly enjoyable book. That’s hardly surprising. As Clausewitz said: war is a mere continuation of policy by other means.

[J Earl · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Shortest History of War by Gwynne Dyer offers both an excellent overview of that history as well as working definitions of what qualifies as war and the elements that go into making for war.

The early history is what many readers will recognize as warfare while the more modern (but not contemporary) history is that same concept on a larger and ever more destructive scale. It is in the recent history of war where Dyer excels. This is also where the various aspects of why and how we decide on war become paramount. Like any rational being he hopes and wants to find ways to minimize (and ideally eliminate) war, yet he also knows from experience (reserve officer, lecturer of war studies, etc) that war will not easily, if ever, be eliminated.

While some show their need to compensate for their shortcomings (figurative and literal, no doubt) by mistakenly claiming entire chapters are nothing but subjective "fluff," don't let their limited reading comprehension abilities sway you. Analysis is not purely subjective, particularly when supported by statistics and multiple research studies. Dyer certainly offers some opinions, but most of what he offers is analysis based on facts (dirty word to some).

For those who want a short history of warfare as well as an up-to-date assessment of where we are now in relation to potentially devastating warfare, this is an excellent place to start. In fact, if you mainly just want that basic framework, this is all you will need. There are good notes at the end that both provide the sources for all the "subjective" analysis and offer direction for further research.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

[Nico Minaj · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read for anyone looking to understand all the old wars people mention that you have no idea about. Now whenever someone mentions the 30, 100, or 7 Years' War I can confidently know which one is which (I guess I didn't have to pay for that college class?).

Besides a short foreword about the human condition and the institution of war, as well as an afterword talking you down from a ledge after ~80 pages of "Holy mackerel we're all cooked except for maybe the Southern Hemisphere", the book is organized into 3 parts.

Part 1 covers ancient war (3500-1500 BCE), which is well written and explores aspects of history I feel are under-appreciated. Dyer takes the time to decode some myths and look fondly on ancient war crimes, then moves on to Part 2. Classical and Limited War (1500-1900 CE) took me back to my European History class and was very educated with its telling of medieval history, which has until recently been often misrepresented. Part 3 is Total and Nuclear War (1900-present), which I believe is full of information useful to a citizen of the world. The extents the author goes to educate the audience on the reality of nuclear weapons and the future we must face with them is honestly eye-opening.

The book has its flaws, most notably the variety of spelling mistakes, but none too major as to invalidate it from anything it's trying to achieve. As a whole, I think this book I great for the average reader plainly looking to dip their toes into the daunting world of old wars, battles, and social studies.

[Aditi · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Shortest History of War by Gwynne Dyer is like a thrilling rollercoaster ride through the turbulent landscape of human conflict, and let me tell you, it's a journey you won't want to miss.

Dyer, an acclaimed military historian, takes us on a whirlwind tour from the primitive days of our hunter-gatherer ancestors to the chilling realities of the rival nuclear powers of today. And the one thing that remains constant throughout this wild ride?
Our unwavering penchant for war when resources are on the line.

What sets this book apart is Dyer's skillful exploration of the shift from limited wars to total wars, a transition interrupted by the chilling moment when Hiroshima bore the brunt of nuclear devastation.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Dyer guides us through the complexities of the Cold War and the harrowing backdrop of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which shattered the longest peace between major powers since World War II.

Throughout the book, Dyer delves into anthropology, psychology, and other relevant fields to unravel the enigmatic drivers of conflict.

It's not just a retelling of history; it's a deep dive into the human psyche.

As you turn the pages, you'll find yourself in awe of how he uncovers the roots of war and reveals the hidden forces that have shaped our belligerent past.

Gwynne Dyer has delivered a masterpiece that will leave you both enlightened and inspired.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Who would have thought a history of WAR would be so depressing?! When I started this book I knew it would be delving into ultimately a very morbid subject matter but I think there were defo arguements that could have been made about how wars have gotten bigger and therefore so have their consequences, then the break out of those consequences could have been quite interesting. Equally, I think there's a whole missed out section over what could have been the 1990-2000s civil wars which are kind of brushed over in favour of a three chapter rant about our inevitable demise via nuclear winter. And not the Fallout 3, "grab your pet dog and let's go fight the super mutants" type of nuclear winter, but instead the "you're gonna eat your dog and your hamster on day nine" type of nuclear winter.

I think ultimately this book felt more like a philosophical lecture than a well thought out break down of war. And your appetite for the book will depend on how much you agree with the lecture. Me, personally, I've got a wife who exacts morale lessons in life from Love Island, I get enough lectures as it is, ya know?

But for the record, I have it on high authority that Ekin-Sue's continued anger and jealousy towards other girls on the Island will only drive Davide away. Power point slides on "how to keep your man in check" avaible upon request.

[B. Rule · Rating 3 out of 5]

This short skim through the history of war is helped by the author's slightly acerbic asides. He stakes out an optimistically realist position: war is inevitable but maybe we can lessen its frequency by smart conflict resolution frameworks, including supporting international cooperation through the UN or similar orgs. He points out that nukes have changed the game, but that they've also led to maybe the longest period in human history of peace between great powers. It's unlikely that peace will hold, but the costs of failure are too great to contemplate.

I especially enjoyed some of the comparisons to our closest primate cousins to evaluate whether war is a peculiarly human enterprise (spoiler alert: not really, but we've turned it into something distinct in the scale and ferocity at which we approach it). Analyzing through the lens of egalitarian vs. hierarchical societies was informative, although Dyer cautions that egalitarianism is not necessarily any more pacific. This is history at a high level of generality, so don't expect too much on the particulars of any one conflict (although he does sometimes opine perceptively on a few). If you want a short book to convince you that reshuffling the international deck every 50 years or so through general war is lamentable but unavoidable given the inherent instabilities of balance of power, you're in the right spot.

[Martina Kiewek · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an incredible book. Dyer charts a path from the origins of war in our primate ancestors to modern warfare and nuclear proliferation. With a mix of anthropology, psychology, history, military strategy, and geopolitics, the book had me enthralled from cover to cover.

Dyer not only teaches us about the history of important battles, he also contextualizas modern conflicts and enlightens us about geopolitical dynamics that help explain the driving forces behind these conflicts.

Every chapter revealed some new information that legitimately blew my mind and I found myself constantly sharing things I learned in the book with friends and family. Additionally, Dyer uses diagrams very effectively to communicate his main points which makes them both digestible and memorable.

You don’t have to be a history buff or have a particular interest in war to enjoy this book. What I learned has left me with a much deeper understanding of the past, present, and future of war, something I think we all can benefit from.