Why Nations Go to War

by John George Stoessinger

Transmitting an understanding of warfare from World War I to the present, WHY NATIONS GO TO WAR, a unique book and a product of reflection by author, John G. Stoessinger, is built around ten case studies, culminating in the new wars that ushered in the twenty-first century: Iraq, Afghanistan, and the wars between Arabs and Israelis in Gaza and in Lebanon. The distinguishing feature of the book remains the author's emphasis on the pivotal role of the personalities of leaders who take their nations, or their following, across the threshold into war.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, War, Politics, Military Fiction, Political Science, International Relations

448 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1978

Reviews

[Sean Sullivan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This classic of the undergraduate international relations course (where I read it) is actually a pretty neat little book. Of course the underlying theory (that war reason for war is largely related to the personality and personal issues of the countries leaders at the time of the war) is deeply, deeply flawed* but its brief historical breakdowns make a for a good introduction or refresher on the major conflicts of the 20th century .

Stoessinger takes most of the major conflicts of the 20th century and dispatches them in thirty pages or so of tightly written history (for which this book is good) and oversimplified political analysis (for which this book isn’t as good). Reading about the start of WWI in a book written by someone who thinks it is all a misunderstanding is interesting, and in some way illuminating, but it is still a poor substitute for a more nuanced analysis.

* I’m sorry, Hitler was a sociopath, yes, but that isn’t the prevailing reason we got WWII. And Nasser may have been an ego maniac, but that isn’t the primary explanation for the Suez Canal business.

[Michael Griswold · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why Nations Go To War has become an iconic text in the study of war and peace. The tenth edition of the text includes chapters on the United States post 9-11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the results of which are still unfolding before us. Stossenger's historical case studies from WW1 to present are readable and yet full of depth, which made the 432 pages that comprise this book just fly by as the reader is taking on a tragic journey into each presidents or dictators war room. The conclusions he draws are not so perfect, however.

For Stossenger, war is rooted in misperceptions and diluted self-interests of individual leaders and decision makers. A group-think mentality seems to emerge as leaders bind themselves to courses of action and any person or intelligence information that dares question the dominant view is cast aside. I'm willing to buy in to a point, but I have two central problems with the whole idea that leaders make war, as persuasive as the argument may be:

1. One leader can't just make war, particularly in democratic societies where there's a military establishment, various advisors and public opinion that a politician needs to worry him/herself with.

2. This implies that if a different leader where in charge that war may not occur. We can't say such a thing. I'm particularly thinking of the Vietnam case where four successive US Presidents--both Republican and Democrat deepened involvement in Vietnam. If we begin engaging in if...then thinking then we've lost the war against understanding war, in my view.

Bottom line: Stossenger is golden on history, but his ideas are part of a debate that has raged for decades. Pick up the book and make up your own mind on the links between misperception and war.

[C.S. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an old textbook from way back in the day that I kept because I always wanted to finish the sections that weren't actually assigned reading. Probably not the most in-depth analysis of global conflict, but as an overview it's top-notch. Stoessinger creates a compelling argument that war is never inevitable, and that the ultimate responsibility for conflict will always come down to individuals.

[Spencer Willardson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was given this book to read by a colleague who uses it in class. I really enjoyed the short synopses of different conflicts. The writing is good and the voice of the author is clear and has a moral clarity that is refreshing. I don't know if I learned anything new about the different conflicts - I have spent a number of years reading about them - but the presentation was great and I appreciated the clarity of these summaries. I recommend this book to anyone interested in the way the world works, and who is hopeful that the world could work differently at some point.

[Sean Watson · Rating 1 out of 5]

This guy is the ultimate Monday night quarterback. This whole book is a blather of selective facts stated ex post facto to portray a simplistic message. Utter bull crap.

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I stole this book from my roommate who is reading it for one of his classes, and I was surprised by how much I liked it. I really enjoyed the way that the author considered specific people and personalities in his analyses of the events that lead up to wars and other momentous events rather than attributing them to "the forces of history" or some other vague concept. People start wars, not destiny or the forces of nature. I was especially struck by this approach in his discussion of WWI, where he argued that the war was caused more by pride and political posturing than anything else. Germany attacked France without any provocation and thus committed itself to a two-front war that cost millions of lives simply because they were afraid to deviate from a train schedule! The chapters on Yugoslavia and India were also quite fascinating. I thought that this book said some very insightful things about the importance of compromise, empathy, and diplomacy between nations and also showed how prideful leaders with a distorted view of the world can cause unimaginable suffering.

[Kathleen McRae · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why Nations go to War was a very good read and certainly gave a lot of insight into various conflicts in the 20th century. there was a chapter at the end of the book that made me view this book with a slightly different perspective.I think it was a pro american take on things.The author was expressing ideas about the futility of war and its devastating effects on most of the lives it touches but I felt he was glossing over the effects american globalism and military mindset plus their political meddling have caused many of these same conflicts.

[Lynne · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this during my college days and just reread my daughters updated edition. WHAT A GREAT BOOK! Perfect as an introduction (or catch up) on what has been happening around the world.

This latest edition does have quite an "author's slant". Stoessinger must be getting impatient with what he sees as mistakes by statesmen and despots. He comes right out with judgment calls on the Iraq war. He is blunt in his opinions.

[Romanna · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’ve always wondered what made countries decide to enter or start a war. This book provided a really interesting focus on specific wars and their causes. Every war provides lessons for the future. I wish our leaders read it.

[thethousanderclub · Rating 4 out of 5]

I remember sitting in my 20th Century Humanities class, many years ago. We were learning about the causes of World War I—the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his spouse, national alliances, the dreaded arms race. I remember feeling like the explanations were missing something, but I didn't know what. Everything seemed so deterministic, almost as if the catalyst for World War I was predestined and unavoidable. As I have studied history further and in other contexts, that determinism has seemed to be a recurring theme—showing up in popular tomes like Guns, Germs, and Steel. Yet, it still felt incomplete. Why Nations Go to War is an impressive and riveting rebuttal to the deterministic view of history. National conflicts are not predetermined by a serendipitous amalgamation of circumstances. Rather, individuals—prideful, paranoid, ambitious, unstable—are the primary agents for why entire nations are soaked in blood and thrust into horror.

There is far more psychology at play in Why Nations Go to War than you would usually find in most books on similar topics. (Perhaps Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly comes close). Stoessinger, like me, was unsatisfied by the traditional explanations of the origins of national conflicts. He doesn't abandon all conventional wisdom but rather looks beyond it. The sparks that lit the conflagration of World War I aren't merely national alliances but also the unstable character and paranoid nature of the German Kaiser William II. As Stoessinger often points out in his book, the very things that historians often suggest lead to war—for example, national alliances—could also have been used to avoid war; therefore, they cannot be the only causes. The origin of the conflict must reside elsewhere.

Why Nations Go to War is a sobering book. It not only touches upon the incalculable suffering caused by war and contention, but it also insists that the cause of so much of it is due to mundane vices. We all feel prideful stubbornness when faced with evidence which contradicts long-held beliefs. But how many of us hold the fates of thousands, perhaps millions, in our hands when we make a decision to act? Yet, there are a few in history who have held that power and who will hold that power, and their vices could lead to the destruction of nations. While reading the book, I was reminded of the following quote from Neal A. Maxwell: ". . . the wars of tomorrow are this day being forged in the overheated families of today. How many dictators or assassins do we need to study in order to understand the consequences of distortion in the home? How many more examples do we need, including the energy crisis, where a few control the resources needed by many, before realizing that food and fiber are not the real challenge? Rather, it is selfishness and our human delivery systems. And where, indeed, can one learn, first-hand, selflessness and sharing? In the home, where such skills and attitudes tend to be learned, if they are learned at all."

Thankfully, the interdisciplinary approach used by Stoessinger never descends into Freudian psycho-analytical blather. I found Stoessinger's insights thoughtful and provocative. Historical analysis is as loaded as any other discipline with disagreement and counter-argument. Based on my own experience learning about history—both formally and informally—Why Nations Go to War is one of the most compelling contrarian arguments I have ever read. It's an excellent book, and I highly recommend it for all students of history—dilettantes and experts alike.

https://thethousanderclub.blogspot.com/

[Kashif Nasir · Rating 5 out of 5]

I just finished Why Nations Go to War by John G. Stoessinger. And I absolutely loved it. It took me away. I had been struggling with most books. Killers of the Flower Moon is great, but it gets slow after the first half, but it did manage to finish it.

I love John’s book because it starts like all great books start, a genuine desire to know things. The author laments that he wants to know why nations go to war, and that's how the book was born. Many great writers have done this, like Greene with his 48 laws of power. Greene had been outsmarted his whole life, and when he had had enough, he decided to figure things out, and 48 laws of power were born.

Why Nations Go to War is a very concise and unbiased overview of several modern wars. It covers World War I, World War II, four wars between Israel and Arabs, the Vietnam War, the Iran Iraq War, the South and North Korea War, Yogoslavia, Bosnia, and Kuwait (operation Dessert Storm, I used to play that video game, finally understood why we were in the oil fields), and almost all modern day conflicts.

The author seems utterly unbiased, as he criticises every side's actions. He narrates wars in a manner that is easy to recall and a joy to read.

Anyway, does the book answer the question of why nations go to war?

Indeed, there are several reasons, and one of the biggest is fear. Leaders and generals are usually afraid that if the other nation took the initiative in war, they would be left behind. So mostly both sides act out of fear, and this triggers war. The other reason is the macho and ego of the leaders and generals. They overestimate their ability to fight. And make the issue personal when its just a ground conflict.

One thing that was illuminated by this book was that the war itself is its cure. Most wars end when both sides have exhausted themselves. Leaders try to make peace when war has drained their resources.

The other thing that I observed more and more was sheer American stupidity, like in Vietnam and Iraq. In both wars, all US presidents lied. Declassified documents proved that the Americans had lied. They left Iraq worse than it had been. And Vietnam was a regression; the communists reinstalled themselves, and America ended up negotiating with people he had come to annihilate—the same scenario in Afghanistan. Just sheer absurd stupidity. Stupid americans.

Although I was already familiar with several conflicts and figures, I came to be a huge fan of Vietnam's communist leader, Ho Chi Minh, the guy who fought America and its allies for thirty years and came out victorious. (Huge, huge fan; teach me, oh wise one.)

So this is a really good book if you are a history buff like me. Its very entertaining, and you can meet major historical figures like the presidents, the generals, and the resistance leaders who were labelled as terrorists. So its a great book.

[Muhammad Abu · Rating 4 out of 5]

" Why Nations go to war " the name of book itself, highlights the content inside it.
Jhon G.Stoessinger, the writer of this book has avidly explained, that nationalism , economic factors, Alliance system , militarism and some other bloodless abstract factors lead a country to war. These wars are begun by people. Besides, the writes has given five case studies from past wars to prove his statements. Including, two world wars, Korea , Vietnam, India and Pakistan, and the Arab states and Israel.
Firstly, Stoessinger claims that when states feel their pride and prestige have major threat to lose it's originality in the eyes of other states, the decision of war at that moment becomes irreversible. For instance, Austria felt in case of assassination of king Duke Ferdinand, if they would have remained silent on such loss. They might have been considered a powerless state surviving on the mercy of other alliances. Secondly, the writer gives a statement accusing the leaders, who have reins of government to run state are responsible for wars, since they egoistially take decision without pondering, the millions of lives putting in danger to be slaughtered. Thirdly, writer asks a question and answers it by himself. Could the disaster of war can be averted? It becomes very hard to avert the disater of war, once the fire lits and different alliance jumps into the deep of fire. It continuously expands, untill and unless any other super power state wishes to cease it.

In the last but not least , the writer claims, three of most dreadful wars of our time were fought on Indian subcontinent between Pakistan and India. First, Colonalism, partition, and war , second the kashimr war 1965 and third the bloody dawn of Bangladesh. Stoessinger, writes new nation are seldom born without great Pain.

At the conclusion of book , Stoessinger writes , war is sickness , since it brings within a storm of destruction in shape of Human killings.

Fvrt lines from Boook ;
Even in our sleeps
Pain that we cannot forget
Falls drop by drop upon the heart
Untill in our own despair
Against our will
Comes wisdom
Through the awful grace of God.

[Lauren · Rating 5 out of 5]

An account of 6 major wars in the last century or so. Throughout history classes I learned that nations go to war because of alliances or certain objectives. This book looks more at the mindset of leaders in order to explain how decisions are made throughout the course of a war - what leaders are thinking about when deciding whether to initiate, escalate, or continue in war. It helped me better understand what war 'is' and learn about commonalities across recent wars.

Stoessinger summarizes some of the principles that repeatedly appear in his research into different wars:

The case material reveals that perhaps the most important single precipitating factor in the outbreak of war is misperception. Such distortion may manifest itself in four different ways: in a leader's image of himself; a leader's view of his adversary's character; a leader's view of his adversary's intentions toward himself; and, finally, a leader's view of his adversary's capabilities and power.

There is a remarkable consistency in the self-images of most national leaders on the brink of war. Each confidently expects victory after a brief and triumphant campaign.

Distorted views of the adversary's character also help to precipitate a conflict. If a leader on the brink of war believes that his adversary will attack him, the chances of war are fairly high. If both leaders share this perception about each other's intent, war becomes a virtual certainty.

A leader's misperception of his adversary's power is perhaps the quintessential cause of war. It is vital to remember however, that it is not the actual distribution of power that precipitates a war, it is the way in which a leader thinks that power is distributed. The war itself then slowly, and in agony, teaches men about reality.

[Roxali Kamper · Rating 3 out of 5]

John G. Stoessinger explains history through his book, and the political tensions of the times. He goes through monumental moments leading up to, during, and some of the aftermath of the modern wars. The modern wars are wars from World War One, up to the Israeli-Arab wars. One segment that was difficult to get through was within the chapter: The Iron Dice, "Now that it was imminent, each general was terrified lest his adversary move first and thus capture the initiative" (Stoessinger 17). What made this segment such a difficult read, was in reality the formatting to the page. Nearly all of page 17 was one single paragraph in stark standard font with harsh black against bright white, instead of a soft black against a comforting tan. Keeping one's eyes on the proper place in the page was a challenge due to the harshness of the text on the paper. Another contributing factor to the difficulty of the text is the redundancy. Various times before and after the mentioned quote within page 17, other parts of the book mentioned the raging paranoia the general's faced. What did support the book and make it intriguing however, were moments like this, "The entire area controlled by Israel in 1949 was somewhat larger than the area that had been allotted to the Zionists in the partition resolution of 1947; the Arab invasion had played into the hands of the Jews" (224). Action is what had to have made this scene as entertaining as it was. Action, and the change of paragraph length and writing style. The words became easier to read as the book went on; however, it could just be the reader becoming accustomed to Stoessinger's writing style. This tale is for an individual who has time and patience, without both of those pleasantries, reading Why Nations Go To War is a challenging task. The information within is valuable, but hard to understand due to its unreadable language within.

[cncundiff · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wish we could rate at half stars—this doesn't quite feel like a wholehearted 5-star recommendation, but deserves more than a simple four. If you're looking to be a better informed person (particularly about 20th century conflicts), there's not a better book to consult.

Regardless of your opinions or interest in the book, if you ever see a copy laying around—stop what you are doing. Read the epilogue. It's a chilling and inspiring recount of the author's flight from Austria in 1938 when he was a child. It will take you all of ten minutes, and it absolutely worth reading the story of the people that saved his life.

The book as a whole is well-crafted, especially for non-fiction. What could have been a long slog through historical battles ends up an engaging blend of history and narrative. Each chapter discusses a different conflict: its rise, its reasons, and its ebb. At the end, a conclusory chapter pulls from each of the cases and notes interesting correlations from each conflict. Stoessinger's deft talent for words gives the reader exactly as much as they can understand without feeling like the material is watered down, and it's hard to oversell how happy that makes me as a reader.

There are times where it feels like Stoessinger fills the gaps of history with narrative. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but I could see historians or other sticklers of inerrancy bristling at the (small) license Stoessinger takes with some of the older wars.

In short, this is an incredible initial dive into many of these conflicts of the 20th century. If you have any interest in understand world history a little more, you should absolutely start here.

[Hussam · Rating 4 out of 5]

If the iron dice must roll, May God help us. These were the words of the German chancellor on the eve of World War 1. This book takes the wars of 20th century as a case study and tries to find out the main reason behind why nations go to war. The main thesis put forward by the writer is that war breaks out because of the misperception of powerful individuals involved. These misperceptions can be about their self created image, about the strength of their adversary. Stoessinger focuses on the human element and questions the character of the leadership on both sides of the conflicts who couldn't satisfy their egos. He also postulates that it is impossible for anyone to win a decisive victory in modern warfare as nuclear armed states can annihilate each other. Another aspect that emerges from the case studies is that those who initiate war have never emerged as victors. I really like how he builds up his argument and on the basis of that, presents a solution to prevent future wars. It is necessary for global leaders to be more empathetic if we are to live in a peaceful world.

[Waqar Ahmed · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you want a history book that covers the wars in the previous century and gives some insight into the men behind them, I recommend this. But if you want an unbiased and realistic account of things and reasons behind the wars, this is not for you.

There's no mention, whatsoever, of geopolitics or other things that are one of the reasons behind war. The author seems to think that the reason behind wars is because of the leaders of the country and their personalities which in my opinion is a deeply flawed argument.

Moreover, the arguments and conclusions are drawn from selected facts while ignoring many other realities. Consider for example the case of Indo/Pak wars, the author seems to think its deeply rooted in religion. Nothing could be more wrong, and I am forced to say that the author is deeply misinformed and grossly misunderstands the history and the reasons behind the wars in Indo/Pak region.

[Jeff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read the first edition of this book in college. It was a quarter the size of the 8th edition. The book impressed back then and when I came across this edition, I was not disappointed. Was impressed with the author's brief, clear and concise accounts of the origins and results of the 4 Arab-Israeli wars, 3 India-Pakistan wars, and the Balkan wars. Best of all his moving epilogue really drove home the point of the whole book.

[Hassaan Bukhari · Rating 3 out of 5]

Almost 80% of the books tells the history which can be found anywhere. The analysis part is only the last chapter that is only of around 25 pages. Telling history was necessary as the writer needed cas studies but the analysis part should have been a little longer and apart from that it could've been written better. Although I liked it and learned alot from it but a constant feeling of something is missing was there while reading.

[Lana · Rating 5 out of 5]

That epilogue had no business being this sad I am crying…

Overall there is so much good analysis in this book and in my opinion, it is a good introduction to the 9 case studies stoessinger discusses provided the limited page capacity. I am eager to read more about certain people and events that I never really considered which is what I went into the book hoping for.

[Farukh Sarkulov · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was surprisingly captivating given the content matter. The short chapters that go over a single war are very interesting. Stoessinger does a good job of describing how various factors went into driving the outcomes of all the conflicts.

Very solid read, and for being 40 years old, still a very pertinent read.

[Eisa Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a good review of 20th century conflicts, with that said, I feel like the author diminishes the reasons that nations actually go to war to put a majority of the blame the nation's leader. Yes, leaders are very important to how wars begin/end, but how does a nation get to the point of empowering said leader to make those decisions.

[Jaya Krishna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read if you want to understand about history of wars on our earth and generally what thinking lead to these wars, these are at large scale, but similar thinking we can find in people where wars are between families, small communities etc

[Jessica Liston · Rating 2 out of 5]

over-simplistic, pro-american imperialism book. starts with an interesting historical analysis about war but then falls apart as it gets later into the 20th century

[Eli Benner · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read the 8th Ed., but still a good read if you‘re really into psychology.

[Steven Howick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really gave a good insight into why the wars occurred, particularly for those I had little previous knowledge of. (this is a review of the 5th edition not the latest)

[John Eliade · Rating 4 out of 5]

I give this book four stars because it's a really amazing read... for the first 2/3 and then it starts to decline. But first the good stuff:

This book goes over alternative theories of war, perhaps humanity's greatest failing. Dr. Stoessinger proposes that "History does not make history. Men and women make foreign policy decisions." So while people who are very anti-great man history will look down upon this narrative and Dr. Stoessinger's theory(ies), it certainly deserves consideration especially to emphasize a more compassionate and considerate world, and one with less violence. Dr. Stoessinger was raised as a young boy in Vienna and Prague until 1941 when he and his mother managed to get a very hastily and mysterious visa to cross the Soviet Union, enter Japan, and live in Japanese occupied Shanghai. This narrative is not interwoven through the academic text (a huge plus, as it would become more of a memoir and less of a researched consideration about war and its causes) but bookends the text with Stoessinger's lifelong passion evolving out of the questions of his life, and ending with a very touching story of how his life was saved those many moments on the trail from Prague to Shanghai and beyond.

Aside from the Great Man Theory stuff, which is generally out of vogue today (but I would argue that it still merits certain considerations and we're in need of a more all encompassing "Theory of History" and one that's less presumptive and singular) it's a bit odd that Stoessinger keeps updating the book with later editions. The first edition of "Why Nations Go to War" was published in 1974, before Vietnam was even over and could conclusively be considered. I can only imagine that the book was (literally) 100 pages long, which only encompasses World War I, Barbarossa, and the Korean War... that leaves out 3/4 of the book (Vietnam, Yugoslavia, India/Pakistan, Israel/Arabs, and the recent conflicts in Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan). Which is astounding. I was reading the 10th edition, but I can gather that we're well past it now (He still discusses Saddam Hussein as post-trial, pre-dead).

That said, there is a quite noticeable change after Vietnam. Stoessinger should really have split this into a two-part work: "Why Men Go to War" and "Why Nations Go to War." It's very clear from his World War I to Vietnam chapters that the personalities are the real crux of his argument, narrative, and what makes the books so interesting (they seem like they were practically written for me: character study, mass death, historical shifting points, etc.). The latter part of the work still has those elements, but very selectively. There is a noticeable slip of the personality analyses and the tiny decisions made by the leaders of the wars afterward, making them very much wars between nations, and less so the whims of monarchs and their underlings. In the Yugoslavia chapter, for example, he goes over quite a bit about Milosevic, but not to the depth that he discusses Kaiser Wilhelm. He also spends considerable time on the relationship between George W. Bush and Saddam Hussein, but nothing compared to the quality of his Hitler vs. Stalin analysis.

I'm not sure what to make of this. Maybe it's about the triumph of democracy that Stoessinger is subtly or unsubtly making? That the actions between Israel and the Arab states, or India and Pakistan are still the actions of foreign policy makers, but the state is much more of a collective effort, and less an extension of any one person? Or is it just bad editing? Material that would make for an excellent book, but a different one?

I will say this also: if you're looking for a basic primer on a lot of the conflicts of the twentieth century for which you know little about (Yugoslavia, India/Pakistan, or a very balanced view of the Israel/Arab conflict, hard to come by, especially from a Jew) you can do a lot worse than "Why Nations Go to War" and hardly better.

[Ian · Rating 5 out of 5]

The horrifying answer to the question posed by the title is: Mostly by mistake. Or, according to a quote from the German Chancellor of 1914, at a roll of "the iron dice." A compulsively readible book that focuses not so much on campaigns or strategies but on the underlying human motivations.

[Sam Weller · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not a huge nonfiction reader, but this book was great, I especially enjoyed the section on Vietnam. Stoessinger does his homework and informs in a really entertaining way. He was super clutch for my Foreign Policy Essays.

[Michelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read an older edition of this book (published in 1993, I believe). I am interested to see that he has more recent editions, and I wonder what his opinions on more recent wars are.

This book was very enlightening, and I am glad to have read it. Some parts were very difficult, as in they were heart breaking. I never like being reminded of the horrors of war, and I was especially saddened to learn of the atrocities committed to the Iraqi people by the Iraqi people. I had never realized before how evil Saddam Hussein was.

I learned a lot about history and parts of the world of which I was previously ignorant. I recommend this book to everyone.

The author began his research for the book because he was dissatisfied with the reasons history books contained for why wars began. Too often it seemed that people by and large believed that wars happened because "Fate" or "God" willed it—that the leaders had no choice, that they had to go to war. The author found it hard to believe that war ever had to happen, so he began to research and see if he could find any other reasons why wars started. As he did so, he was surprised to actually find discernible patterns for why wars began.

He hopes that in understanding better real causes of war perhaps future wars can be avoided.

I was born after the Vietnam and Korean Wars, and I must say that the book was very eye opening in regards to those wars. It also made me disappointed in the actions of some American leaders.

Oh, and I must add that it also made me understand many more aspects of the United Nations than I ever had before.