What do you think?
Rate this book
Military Blunders: The How and Why of Military Failure
Describes some of the worst military blunders perpetrated during this millennium, looking at commanders who brought disaster on their men, fiascoes caused by meddling politicians, and fatal underestimations of the enemy
384 pages, Paperback
First published October 30, 1997
35 people are currently reading
262 people want to read
About the author
Saul David
53 books176 followersSAUL DAVID was born in Monmouth in 1966 and educated at Ampleforth College and Edinburgh and Glasgow Universities (History MA and PhD).
An expert in the wars of the Victorian period, he began writing his first history book when he was twenty-five and has since completed eight more. They include: The Homicidal Earl: The Life of Lord Cardigan (1997), a critically-acclaimed biography of the man who led the Charge of the Light Brigade; The Indian Mutiny:1857 (2002), shortlisted for the Westminster Medal for Military Literature; Zulu: The Heroism and Tragedy of the Zulu War of 1879 (2004), a Waterstone's Military History Book of the Year; and the bestselling Victoria's Wars: The Rise of Empire (2006). In 2007 he signed a three book deal with Hodder & Stoughton to write a series of historical novels set in the late Victorian period. The first, Zulu Hart, was published on 5 March 2009 to critical acclaim with The Times describing it as a 'rattling good yarn' with 'a compelling, sexy hero who could give Cornwell's Sharpe a run for his money'. He is currently writing a history of the British Army.
An expert in the wars of the Victorian period, he began writing his first history book when he was twenty-five and has since completed eight more. They include: The Homicidal Earl: The Life of Lord Cardigan (1997), a critically-acclaimed biography of the man who led the Charge of the Light Brigade; The Indian Mutiny:1857 (2002), shortlisted for the Westminster Medal for Military Literature; Zulu: The Heroism and Tragedy of the Zulu War of 1879 (2004), a Waterstone's Military History Book of the Year; and the bestselling Victoria's Wars: The Rise of Empire (2006). In 2007 he signed a three book deal with Hodder & Stoughton to write a series of historical novels set in the late Victorian period. The first, Zulu Hart, was published on 5 March 2009 to critical acclaim with The Times describing it as a 'rattling good yarn' with 'a compelling, sexy hero who could give Cornwell's Sharpe a run for his money'. He is currently writing a history of the British Army.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
July 31, 2021
It's funny to reading about imperialists getting wiped out
January 2, 2012
Military Blunders: The How and Why of Military Failure is a 3 Star review of incompetence in military action from Roman times to the first Gulf War. I appreciate his inclusion of maps for some of the battles but Mr. David could have included more detail, especially for those battles and actions that are not commonly known. He breaks the reasons for failure into 5 categories:
Unfit to Command – 6 examples of cronyism or The Peter Principle, wrong man for the job: First Afghan War and the British retreat from Kabul; The Charge of the Light Brigade; McClellan at Antietam; Battle of Spion Kop; Suvla Bay (Gallipoli); Fall of Singapore in WWII.
Planning for Trouble – 6 examples of PPP…piss poor planning: The Jameson Raid (Boer War); Colenso (2nd Boer War); 1st Day on the Somme; Dieppe Raid; Arnhem (Market-Garden); Bravo Two Zero (1st Gulf War)
Meddling Ministers—6 examples of ego or politics overruling common sense: Bannockburn; Sedan (Franco-Prussian War); St Valery (just after Dunkirk); North Africa (before Rommel appears); Stalingrad; Goose Green (Falklands)
Misplaced Confidence—6 examples of “we can kick their ass…oops no we can’t”: Teutoburger Wald (Romans); The 2nd Crusade; Custer’s Last Stand; Isandhlwana (Zulus); Yalu River, Korea; Dien Bien Phu
Failure to Perform—6 examples of both officer and soldier poor performance: Crecy; Caporetto; March 1918 German attack; Annual (Morocco); Crete (WWII); Kasserine Pass.
My favorite passage in the book occurs when the Italians are getting their butts kicked by the British and Indian troops in North Africa in early WWII. Anthony Eden modifies Churchill’s quote to: “Never has so much been surrendered by so many to so few!” Not much here for the serious student of military history except it may point out some obscure or lesser known battles that are worthy of study. I know I am going to look into the Boer Wars based on this book.
Unfit to Command – 6 examples of cronyism or The Peter Principle, wrong man for the job: First Afghan War and the British retreat from Kabul; The Charge of the Light Brigade; McClellan at Antietam; Battle of Spion Kop; Suvla Bay (Gallipoli); Fall of Singapore in WWII.
Planning for Trouble – 6 examples of PPP…piss poor planning: The Jameson Raid (Boer War); Colenso (2nd Boer War); 1st Day on the Somme; Dieppe Raid; Arnhem (Market-Garden); Bravo Two Zero (1st Gulf War)
Meddling Ministers—6 examples of ego or politics overruling common sense: Bannockburn; Sedan (Franco-Prussian War); St Valery (just after Dunkirk); North Africa (before Rommel appears); Stalingrad; Goose Green (Falklands)
Misplaced Confidence—6 examples of “we can kick their ass…oops no we can’t”: Teutoburger Wald (Romans); The 2nd Crusade; Custer’s Last Stand; Isandhlwana (Zulus); Yalu River, Korea; Dien Bien Phu
Failure to Perform—6 examples of both officer and soldier poor performance: Crecy; Caporetto; March 1918 German attack; Annual (Morocco); Crete (WWII); Kasserine Pass.
My favorite passage in the book occurs when the Italians are getting their butts kicked by the British and Indian troops in North Africa in early WWII. Anthony Eden modifies Churchill’s quote to: “Never has so much been surrendered by so many to so few!” Not much here for the serious student of military history except it may point out some obscure or lesser known battles that are worthy of study. I know I am going to look into the Boer Wars based on this book.
September 4, 2018
A nice little book to read about (mostly British) military mistakes committed by leaders, generals, officers, and ordinary soldiers.
December 13, 2012
It's not often that you encounter a nonfiction book from 1997 referring to Russians as "Asiatics of low intelligence." Or claiming Singapore fell to the Japanese because all its guns faced the sea. Or confusing Matthew Ridgeway with Maxwell Taylor. Or spelling errors every other page. Editorial sloppiness aside, this is just a rehash of Geoffrey Regan's last 1,000 books, themselves rehashes of Regan's first 1,000.
April 12, 2022
A book of blunders!
With a few blunders by the Author
He's probably much better at studying older conflicts
and he's fairer than most historians
but sometimes the focus in some of his books are too narrow, and you feel that you're only getting part of the story on failure here
I still can't decide if it one should say two or three stars
oh heck how about a 4.8 if you're expecting a lot
and a solid six if you're uncritical and easy going
With a few blunders by the Author
He's probably much better at studying older conflicts
and he's fairer than most historians
but sometimes the focus in some of his books are too narrow, and you feel that you're only getting part of the story on failure here
I still can't decide if it one should say two or three stars
oh heck how about a 4.8 if you're expecting a lot
and a solid six if you're uncritical and easy going
November 25, 2016
I couldn't even finish this book. Unfortunately the author gives more details on how battle happened and not why exactly did they fail. There are too many details for someone who is not well aware of military terms. The many details on: from which hill exactly they attacked, which division attacked which group of soldiers... this is an enciclopedia, not a narrative interesting book.
March 27, 2021
Fine, if you don't like better-edited Wikipedia pages.
There are some interesting stories in here: the ones about British underperformance in South Africa were the standouts for me.
However, the nature of this book means that there are a huge number of names of both people and places that can get fairly disorienting, compounded by the lack of maps.
The persistent myth that Medieval knights couldn't stand up by themselves is perpetuated in here, as well as a bizarrely generous interpretation of the occupation of southern Lebanon by the IDF in 2006 and the destruction and death that was wrought there.
Another reviewer mentioned the at best surprising inclusion of the phrase 'Asiatics of low intelligence' in a book published in 2012. I would like to add to these criticisms calling indigenous Americans 'Indians' and a mixed race person 'half breed'. Consistent use of 'native'.
There are also a shocking number of punctuation and lexical errors here. My favourite was the description of North and South Korea in the 1950s as 'embryo nations'.
Not recommended.
There are some interesting stories in here: the ones about British underperformance in South Africa were the standouts for me.
However, the nature of this book means that there are a huge number of names of both people and places that can get fairly disorienting, compounded by the lack of maps.
The persistent myth that Medieval knights couldn't stand up by themselves is perpetuated in here, as well as a bizarrely generous interpretation of the occupation of southern Lebanon by the IDF in 2006 and the destruction and death that was wrought there.
Another reviewer mentioned the at best surprising inclusion of the phrase 'Asiatics of low intelligence' in a book published in 2012. I would like to add to these criticisms calling indigenous Americans 'Indians' and a mixed race person 'half breed'. Consistent use of 'native'.
There are also a shocking number of punctuation and lexical errors here. My favourite was the description of North and South Korea in the 1950s as 'embryo nations'.
Not recommended.
August 28, 2022
An interesting look at a number of historical failures, grouped into categories of failure, in order to give each chapter a theme. David succeeds in drawing together key concepts to build the narrative he sculpts for each chapter, whilst also summarising the events of each failure in c.10 pages.
Where David falls down is on his Anglo-Centric focus, with no blunders that do not feature a Western perspective. And the language in chapter 5 might have been deemed okay in the 90’s when first published, but given that they’ve added an afterword with mid 00’s blunders, they should consider reconsidering the phrasing utilised in current editions.
Where David falls down is on his Anglo-Centric focus, with no blunders that do not feature a Western perspective. And the language in chapter 5 might have been deemed okay in the 90’s when first published, but given that they’ve added an afterword with mid 00’s blunders, they should consider reconsidering the phrasing utilised in current editions.
October 7, 2023
Dated in outlook, so much so I was shocked it was published in the 21st century. But nothing is as fun as a staid historian getting snippy, and this is a delightfully snippy book.
August 8, 2024
Decent read but needed more maps especially for the battles that span large areas
October 24, 2025
quite poor and slightly racist?
July 4, 2023
Decent anthology of all those times armies screwed up. Horns of Hattin is a particularly well-written extract.
March 21, 2016
a.Very heavy on the "how's" and extremely light on the "why's", this book does not deliver on what it should, according to its title.
b.Do almost all the military blunders in the history of the world happen in the Victorian era to today?
c.Why are there so many British army related blunders and no blunders from all the military history of China (for example)?
d. Page 199: "The Russian army, ....., was composed mainly of Asiatics of low intelligence but huge natural tenacity and endurance". Is this book from the deep South in the 19th Century or from 1997 England?
b.Do almost all the military blunders in the history of the world happen in the Victorian era to today?
c.Why are there so many British army related blunders and no blunders from all the military history of China (for example)?
d. Page 199: "The Russian army, ....., was composed mainly of Asiatics of low intelligence but huge natural tenacity and endurance". Is this book from the deep South in the 19th Century or from 1997 England?
April 19, 2009
I read this a few years back when I got it as a Christmas gift: thought it was a very interesting read and the chapter on the Bravo Two Zero disaster prompted me to go to the original account in Andy McNab's book. Needless to say, if you're not particularly interested in military history I would not bother.
January 23, 2014
This was a delight! Nicely organized and clearly written. Needing a little copy editing here and there, but that's fine. I like the mental image of someone throwing off the "yolk" of tyranny! Messy tyranny ...
May 24, 2013
Интересна беше, само че превода е ужасен. Правописните грешки няма да ги слагам в сметката...
March 6, 2014
a solidly interesting read. nice and diverse, plenty to expand on
March 11, 2015
OK book - expected more though
February 7, 2016
Rather overwhelming (the battles blur), and heroic beyond words.
But oh so sad, so pointless.
But oh so sad, so pointless.
August 16, 2024
An interesting book of numerous mistakes in history's long military history both of command and optical conflicts.
April 9, 2007
I like to learn from failures and it is just as good when it is someone elses failure.
April 5, 2017
It seems like opinions on this book are mixed. I quite enjoyed it as someone with a reasonable interest in military history but with no real expertise in the area.
The book covers 30 land battles that are intended to illustrate failure in five categories. The time period covered is long and the forces involved are fairly diverse, but there is a bias towards more modern conflicts (say in the last 150 years) and those involving British troops. That's fine with me as I'm more interested in those two aspects, but some people might think the view is a bit skewed.
Each example averages around 12 pages, which I thought was enough to explain what happened but not too much to drown in details. Around half of them contain maps, which generally aren't great, so it is sometimes hard to picture what's going on, especially as the text can sometimes be a list of which units attached which.
Overall, quite an interesting book but it could have been more lively.
The book covers 30 land battles that are intended to illustrate failure in five categories. The time period covered is long and the forces involved are fairly diverse, but there is a bias towards more modern conflicts (say in the last 150 years) and those involving British troops. That's fine with me as I'm more interested in those two aspects, but some people might think the view is a bit skewed.
Each example averages around 12 pages, which I thought was enough to explain what happened but not too much to drown in details. Around half of them contain maps, which generally aren't great, so it is sometimes hard to picture what's going on, especially as the text can sometimes be a list of which units attached which.
Overall, quite an interesting book but it could have been more lively.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews