Great for new students and military professionals

Any additional comments?

This was a great overview. I am a retired 30 military officer and war college graduate who still practices in national security issues. This audio presentation was an outstanding way to review and think anew about strategic principals.
It is also a good intro for new students (formal students or just learners for life) to introduce them to foundational pillars of strategic thinking.

23 people found this helpful

Strategy is Not a Crock Pot

In polite society, military studies are as taboo as sex used to be. So perhaps my favorite aspect of these lectures is professor Wilson’s unapologetic interest in war and the smartest ways to wage it. Or, maybe the main reason I enjoyed them so much was that Wilson either tallied with conclusions I’ve reached in the course of my own reading (he even recommends one of my favorite books), or else opened my eyes to aspects of strategic thinking I never knew existed.

That reading has been historical rather than theoretical, so I’ve never delved into Sun Tzu’s Art of War. Though familiar with Thucydides, I never guessed his Peloponnesian War is still a font of wisdom for strategic thinkers. Or, that Machiavelli went beyond politics (given Clausewitz’s famous dictum, of course, that only makes sense). Nor had I understood our Declaration of Independence as, at least in part, an appeal to Just War Theory. While aware of the revolution created by the levee en masse, Jomini and Clausewitz were two names I only knew as peripheral figures in the more general discussion of campaigns and battles. Wilson brings each into focus as founders of schools of thought that are both conflicting and complimentary. And Alfred Thayer Mahan, another figure who has loomed large in my reading, is put into context vis a vis Sir Julian Corbett—and applied in an illuminating way to the realities of the Pacific War.

The last seven lectures deal with the more problematical post- World War II period—problematical because the closer we are to events the easier it is for academic fashion to warp our perspective. So, while admitting “a grudging respect” for Mao, it’s refreshing—and a little surprising—to hear Wilson describe Mao as, “one of the most evil and deranged rulers in history”. For anyone who remembers the 80’s, it was nice to hear him take President Reagan “at his word” about the Strategic Defense Initiative—he really did want to make nuclear weapons obsolete. Wilson’s discussion of nuclear strategy makes much of the hysteria we lived through seem quaint, if not more than a little absurd. In spite of Bob Dylan’s song that bears the same title as these lectures, no one on either side was really itching to press the button.

Wilson's discussion of terrorism is nothing short of eye-opening. Remembering that he is a professor, not a polemicist, he avoids the partisan ferment of post-9/11 America and offers a larger perspective by examining the British experience in Ireland in 1919-1921. Miracle of miracles, this dispassionate approach even extends to the Bush's, father and son.

And, finally, there is Professor Wilson himself. My title is a good example of the kind of common sense and clarity he brings to his subject (“Strategy is not a crock pot; you can’t set it and forget it.”). His delivery is something of a wonder, too. Without a single “um” or “ahhh…”, he speaks throughout in full sentences, but never sounds as if he’s reading off a page.

8 people found this helpful

Great Introductory Overview of Strategic Concepts

What did you love best about Masters of War: History's Greatest Strategic Thinkers?

This may seem like a cliché, but what Carl Sagan did for science, Prof. Wilson has done for Strategy. I am a civilian with no military background. I found Prof. Wilson’s lectures interesting, well-structured, and informative. The lectures have a just the right balance of factual dissertation and storytelling to keep the listener engaged. These lectures have left me with a better mental framework for applying strategic thinking to my own decisions, and for understanding the actions of others on the larger world stage.

What was one of the most memorable moments of Masters of War: History's Greatest Strategic Thinkers?

Prof. Wilson’s attention to the importance of a back-and-forth dialog between civilian and military leaders actually changed my preconceived notions in that area.

22 people found this helpful

I've a lot of reading to do

This course makes me want to read all of the theorists he mentions myself. The extensive intellectual depth that this course takes is very exciting and draws you into the world of strategy.

6 people found this helpful

Necessity

I've listened to this lecture twice now. Regardless of your profession, this lecture provides a great explanation of strategy and critical decision making that can be relevant any where.

6 people found this helpful

Amazing overview of the Masters and well taught.

What did you love best about Masters of War: History's Greatest Strategic Thinkers?

Prof. Wilson did such a great job providing a solid overview that was clear and understandable. I have taken courses that touched these strategic thinkers but no one that I have taken has linked them together so well.

What other book might you compare Masters of War: History's Greatest Strategic Thinkers to and why?

Handel's Masters of War was the closest that I could compare to this lesson but I still would say that Prof. Wilson edges out Handel on this one.

6 people found this helpful

Informative, Yet Still Able To Hold My Attention.

While this audiobook certainly didn't go through each and every point of the strategic masters that they mention (with reason, doing so would make this book amazingly long) it managed to do a lot for me in terms of information. Not just information though, information that I could follow and done in such a way that it held my attention.

Professor Wilson brings the masters to the table, a lot of which I haven't really heard much about or had the chance to read and not only goes into their strengths and weaknesses, but also, at times, goes into context for when and what reason those books were written for in the first place as well as giving us a somewhat deeper look into those masters that wrote the books that many a strategic mind study today.

There was a enough information here to help me think in a different manner as well as get interested in picking up and reading / listening to some other books on strategy and history. It also certainly changed some of my views on how things work today in terms of strategy.

I could see myself coming back to this audiobook later in life (maybe as soon as a year or less) and giving it another listen and I'm sure I'd find more to love about this book. If your interested in strategy at all and you want to know more about the masters of strategy as well as some of their strategies, I encourage you to give this book a shot.

7 people found this helpful

Fast paced art of war

Would you recommend this audiobook to a friend? If so, why?

No I would not. As the title says it is a great lecture series not a great story so the lecturer moves quite fast through the material with the expectation that the listener is well versed in military history. Not for the casual listener more for a student of the military. If that happens to be you well then this is a thorough course covering many characters and military strategies.

Would you be willing to try another book from The Great Courses? Why or why not?

I would buy more classes from the great courses. I own several and while some are hard to follow and keep up with the material I find most to be enlightening and very educational.

Which scene was your favorite?

Fall of Greek states

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

No. You need a break to absorb the just taught materials before moving on to a new part of history and new countries and their battles.

7 people found this helpful

A look through the ages of war and its people

I struggled to finish this in all honesty. The lectures are well put together and well delivered, I just found the topic a little dry. I like military history but due to the lectures covering so many topics and people, there really wasn't the depth that was needed to inspire me to keep going.
That said, this was a primer, it would guide you to reading more about the individuals who played roles in war.

6 people found this helpful

Good beginning - weak end

Would you recommend this book to a friend? Why or why not?

I would recommend the first half of the book. As long as the topic is history and war from past centuries, the professor is very insightful. This is also the case when he talks about modern wars that did not involve the U.S. When it comes to wars the U.S. fought, the storyline is overly biased towards official U.S. political and military opinon and does not critically question motives and conduct.

What was the most interesting aspect of this story? The least interesting?

The history of greek wars and up to and including the french revolution is great. The lessons are insightful and highlight well the development of warfare and it strategic and tactical conduct.

As soon as he comes to the role of the U.S., the class gets incredibly weak. His lesson on the Second Iraq war from a perspective of a "Just war" is a definite low point due to any missing criticality and an overly biased view in favor of official U.S. policy. Just a view examples.
1) He talks at length about the justification in light of the "Just War" theory that president Bush gave (several minutes), yet then fails to mention how questionable this all was in practice, especially with respect to the claimed W.M.D. He reiterates Bush's view that Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a threat to the U.S., yet makes no effort at all to look into this rather controversial claim.
2) He highlights how well U.S. soldiers treated the Iraqi population, which I believe is certainly true (especially as it has to be viewed in the light of a war situation), yet he fails to mention to torture scandal in Iraq.
3) In the rebuilding phase of Iraq, he says it is easy to criticize it, but does not elaborate further very much, certainly not on specific points that would be negative to the U.S.. Yet at the same time, he highlights that the U.S. did not ask for reparations from Iraq as a positive point (which is at least questionable given the justification of the war as intended to free the Iraqi people from tyranny and that in comparison to the U.S., they are very poor).

Conspicously absent is an in depth treatment of the Vietnam war. Vietnam is certainly treated in a lecture when it comes to the interplay of the political side and the military. But the ultimate reasons for the loss of the Iraq war and the lessons to be learned from it are only mentioned briefly.

Was Masters of War: History's Greatest Strategic Thinkers worth the listening time?

Yes, but skip the more modern part.

29 people found this helpful