Brigade Commander Georgii Samoilovich Isserson

Excellent book on evolution of art of war post WW1.

After reading several books about evolving military art and practice I was surprised how much final years of WW1 paved the way for the modern approach to warfare. Isserson manages to explain in a very simple terms limitations of the WW1 linear approach (constant attempts of outflanking that just caused the front to grow ever wider (since defenders wanted to prevent the envelopment) to the point of reaching geographical limitations that basically "killed" any further maneuverability and as a consequence resulted in grinding trench warfare) and experiences from 1918 on both sides (German mass firepower approach and Allied tank tactics) that were proof-of-concept of new ways of waging wars and showed the most promising directions for development of both technical and application means required for successful war fighting [in the future]. Author discusses both offensive and defensive operations (which I found interesting since Soviet doctrine was always more concentrated on offensive) and it is very interesting how both French, British and German experiences from WW1 are analyzed and lessons learned from them.

It is a very interesting book that did not lose anything with time. As a matter of fact I think that predominance of low intensity warfare in last 30 or something years caused the very unfortunate turn of events - (a) military was always deployed and fought the war in conditions where opposition does not have production means of any type (be it because they are various militant cells or states deprived of anything through sanctions that lasted in some cases for decade) so combat is basically just a prolonged police action (level of casualties not withstanding) without any doubt about the dominance of intervening force; (b) politicians got comfortable in starting wars where they know army will encounter, as Black Adder famously said, natives armed with sharpened kiwis. Without casualties wars in all their forms (especially preventive wars that recently totally circumvented the UN and ended , post-facto, with "ooops, we thought they were danger ..... nothing to see here, gotta soldier on now") became something acceptable.

Basically if you look at it, this is not such a different position than say 1900's - major powers fighting preventive police actions (that do take years to finish) with shiny, hi-tech and extremely expensive toys and everybody shunting and dismissing any [what you might call] proper conflict. Reason is very simple - in today's interconnected world making economic pressure seems very risk free and it works until politicians (generally part of society that suffers of grandeur and inability to learn from history because they only live in 4-year cycles) make a great error in judgement and make pressure at the wrong time and place and come across unexpected consequences for their own states. Hopefully we will get another generation of politicians that will also be able statesmen - people who will understand the need for cooperation and communication (maybe third incarnation of League of Nations/UN until some new hegemony starts messing things up in the future - everything is in cycles, ain't it?). To prevent wars world needs statesmen, not bureaucrats.

As Isserson repeats multiple times, true war requires dedication, organization and proper application of force in form of multiple strikes across the width and depth of the theater. His descriptions of echelon approach to breaking through the defensive line and exploiting the momentum (without which entire breakthrough loses meaning) are explained in so easily understandable language it is no wonder book still resonates today, one more proof that basics will always survive the test of time.

Excellent book, highly recommended.… (altro)