Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.53 AVERAGE
3.53 AVERAGE
Forgettable cautionary tale populated by a cast of caricatures. It was quite readable but the whole premise of how the war escalates is flawed, which invalidated what came after.
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
A tedious story with flat characters and predictable outcomes telegraphed far in advance of the conclusion. Ackerman and Stavridis wanted to deliver a character driven cauti0nary tale about where the US might be headed, but in doing so they skip by details, cut away from any action, and focus on a set of characters who are mid-level functionaries with little control over events or their respective destinies.
Unfortunately, none of the characters are all that interesting in and of themselves, so you're not left with much to hang your hat on other than to wonder if they can influence anything. If you're looking for something akin to Tom Clancy or Harold Coyle, keep on looking, you won't find it here. This title yadda yaddas its way past anything of technical or political substance.
Unfortunately, none of the characters are all that interesting in and of themselves, so you're not left with much to hang your hat on other than to wonder if they can influence anything. If you're looking for something akin to Tom Clancy or Harold Coyle, keep on looking, you won't find it here. This title yadda yaddas its way past anything of technical or political substance.
adventurous
dark
informative
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
challenging
dark
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
informative
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
A cautionary tale set 10-minutes Years Into the Future military fiction/political thriller mashup in which the Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo (People’s Republic of China (PRC)) instigates a regional showdown which through miscalculation and misadventure spirals into nuclear war.
McDonnell-Douglas F/A-18 Hornet—Still serving in 2034. First flown in 1980, a 54-year old aircraft.
My audiobook was 10-hours, 49-minutes long. A dead tree copy would be a modest 230-pages. The book had a US 2021 copyright. The audio book had five (5) narrators: Emilly Woo Zeller, P.J. Ochlan, Vicas Adam, Dion Graham, and Feodor Chin voicing the story’s ensemble cast of characters.
This book was co-authored. James Stavridis is a retired United States Navy admiral, currently involved in numerous high-level commercial, academic and media positions. He is the author of about ten (10) non-fiction books on military and political topics. Elliot Ackerman is an American author and former Marine Corps officer. He is the author of five works of fiction. This is the first book I've read by either author.
Firstly, it is not completely necessary to have any previous: military, military history, geography or technology background to be reading this book. However, it would be helpful to have a Popular Mechanics-level understanding of contemporary military systems, a familiarly with military and both PRC and US political organization, and a grasp of Western Pacific Ocean and South Asian, as well as Iranian politics and geography.
Secondly, I have spent several years amongst U.S. and allied soldiers, sailors and airmen, both officers and rankers. I’m also familiar with several US weapon systems, a scant few of which appeared in the narrative. I also fancy myself an amateur military historian and armchairgeneral admiral. This makes me somewhat more critical of the authors, than most folks.
This book was part of the long tradition of modern, hypothetical wars, military fiction first made recently popular in the 1980’s by books like John W. Hackett’s [b:The Third World War: August 1985|1375759|The Third World War August 1985|John W. Hackett|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1183080736l/1375759._SX50_.jpg|1365663] and Tom Clancy’s Red Storm Rising. These genre-books include a detailed military narrative of a future war against the West’s (typically American) then-current geopolitical rivals. Military technology, soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, as well as politicians and political leaders are deeply woven into the story.
Finally, this book likely came into shape in 2020, two years before the Russian Federation’s 2022 invasion of the Ukraine. In the story, the octogenarian Vladimir Putin is still the Russian president in 2034. Russian actions in the story are likewise in-line with recent history.
TL;DR Review
This is how The American Century ends. In the story, there was a Sino-American Great Politics Mess-Up over territorial claims in the South China Sea. This results in a cyber coup de main where modern naval tactical and operational warfare ensues. The US military computer-based systems are revealed to have been thoroughly pwned by the PRC. Meanwhile, Russian and Iranian malfeasance, and combatant governmental miscalculation propel an ‘incident’ into tactical nuclear exchanges between the PRC and USA. The story ends through an unexpected great power intervention to forestall Armageddon which changes the global Balance of Power. The geopolitics of the story were too contrived once past their grounding in the present. Some operational aspects of the combat sidestepped national military doctrine(s) to cater to a better naval combat centered story. However, the combat vignettes were good, albeit brief. The machinations and the exposed flaws Inherent in the System of government of both the US and PRC were more detailed. The authors were too heavy-handed in the lessons learnt. The story illustrated (to me) that, With Great Power Comes Great Insanity.
The Review
Writing was technically good. Descriptive prose was written in a clear, unaffected manner. A competent, details oriented, ‘writing team’ typically produces a well-groomed narrative. The narrative contains a moderate amount of details in scenes on both sides of the conflict. Dialog, at least that related to action scenes was good too. However, I thought the prose meant to elicit emotional impact to be too melodramatic.
In addition, be prepared for an over-use of martial quotations from: Napoleon, Sun-Tzu, Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Abraham Lincoln, etc. Oddly, I don’t recall any American admirals or generals being quoted? I have also left the reader of this review a few quotes I favor.
I had a several real issues with the prose.
Firstly, the characters felt very flat. This was an artifact of the very short, chapters with changing POVs and only a modest number of pages. It did not leave a lot pages for character development, nor did they give me time to become invested in most of them.
Secondly, there was a lot of exposition. This was an advantage in the cut ‘n dried techo-political plotlines. However, the narrative fell flat when attempting to describe emotional relationships other than the “comrades-in-arms” type. Male, female relationships (all relationships were heterosexual) came out as too on the nose.
Finally, as previously written, I have spent some time in the company of ranker: soldiers, sailors and Marines. The lowest ranking member of the US Armed forces receiving any real notice in the prose was a Chief Petty Officer. This story was "the view from above". The lowest rank contributing a POV was a Marine Major. Most were or soon to be admirals. The politicians and governmental office holders were of likewise rarified office appointed or elected.
Two Indians, five Chinese, five Americans, A Russian and an Iranian character carry the story. However, five of the characters provided POVs. Note that in my audio book with its five (5) narrators, each narrator ‘did’ one character. I'll write this again,"Five POVs was too many POVs in the story". Each POV was there to demonstrate an aspect of the conflict. Frankly, there were two (2), perhaps three (3) too many POVs? Except for one, none of them received the development needed.
First amongst equals protagonist-wise was Marine Maj. Chris “Wedge” Mitchell. He was the anchoring USMC POV. He’s a pilot from a family of Marine aviators. Mitchell received the most development of all the characters. He's a warrior and a pilot. He was the tragic, Action Hero. Sandeep "Sandy" Chowdhury is Mitchell’s opposite. He’s a first-generation Indo-American, policy-wonk on the National Security Council. Chowdhury is the Indo-American every man in the White House who sees the situation clearer than his superiors, but is discounted. Chowdhury is also there to anchor the authors' Pro-immigrant theme. He was the Cowardly Lion. Commodore Sarah Hunt, later Admiral Hunt, provides insight into the operational aspects of the conflict. She also adds the woman’s perspective of it and a naval career leading to high rank. She was the woman successful in a man's world, but doubting her success as a woman. Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Farshad provides the second-world perspective to the conflict. He was the warrior who found peace. Chinese Admiral Lin Bao, is the PRC’s expert on Americans, being half-American and graduate of both Harvard Kennedy School of Government and the U.S. Naval War College. Bao provides the PRC military contrast to the U.S. admirals. He was the Gentleman and a Scholar fall guy.
The antagonists include the PRC’s Central Political Bureau, the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, and the still ruling despot Vladamir Putin. The Bao character is the interface with the Chinese Politburo. The Farshad character is the interface with the Russians through a Russian character intermediary. He is also the Iranian leadership interface. Chowdhury is the interface with the antagonists in the White House. By interface, I mean delivering the exposition needed for a reader to understand the structure of power of the nations involved.
The final chapter, “Coda: The Horizon”, was a terribly awkward attempt at The Summation trope, from the surviving POVs. It was the schmaltziest of chapters that had verged on schmaltz throughout.
The book contained no sex, a small amount of drugs, and a small amount of music references. (That's, sex, drugs, and rock 'n roll.) There was a lot of violence, including torture. Alcohol was the only drug consumed. That was in moderation. Music references came from references to background music. Oddly, traditional Indian music received more attention than western. Violence was: physical, small arms, and military heavy weapons. Violence was not gory and only mildly descriptive. Although, there was a particularly descriptive scene with violence against animals. As in many thrillers, the POV contributing protagonists had remarkable stamina and healing capability. Body count was high. (There was a war on.)
There were no maps included in the book, not that I expected them with an audio book. Yet, there should have been maps. I found myself using Google Earth to keep pace with the narrative and to access the terrain. For example: South China Sea.
I also found the time/space aspect of the plot to be suspect. Events did not take into account the vast distances of the Pacific or the friction of wartime conditions on operations. This was all very surprising to me considering the authors' military credentials?
For example,
Frankly, I was greatly surprised the Chinese were not intercepted by American submarines before reaching the North American shore. I would have expected one or a pair of Chinese Shang-class SSNs (Type 093) to have launched a newly developed naval version of the DF-10 long-range land-attack cruise missile. This would not have risked the Chinese surface battlegroup, prudently maintaining them as a fleet-in-being in the relative safety of the western pacific. Also, the naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii would have made a better target than the San Diego naval base. However, The Admiral needed a better story, not a more realistic war?
First and foremost, this story was a story of disruptive technology. Another is that miscalculation, and plain bad luck are endemic to war plans. (I was surprised the authors missed the opportunity to quote Helmuth von Moltke?) Also that opportunist adversaries of the U.S. like the Chinese, Russians and Iranians are likely to play important roles in widening confrontations. Unlike many techno-fests of this genre, the story wasn’t completely there to support the military hardware. In fact, the US’s military hardware was its greatest liability. The real message of the story was, “Asia is rising. The wealth and power of the US are in relative decline.” The subtext was, “Fighting a war with China would be a disaster”
Having written that, the levels of detail were only moderate. The weapons, combat systems and the doctrine applied were very correct. For example, the cyber-attack on some elements of the US Command and Control infrastructure used all the correct terminology and was a textbook example of what could be accomplished by a well-resourced and determined aggressor.
While I thought the guns, drums, smoke, and bugles were good, I also thought the authors took liberties to bend their story to be an epic Pacific air/surface (sea) combat story ala WWII in the Pacific Theater. Inconvenient to the authors’ story were the US Army, Air Force and most of the Marine Corps. While Marine air featured in the story, no Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) were deployed. In general, there was no ground combat by US forces in the narrative. Strategically, the opportunist assault by the would have sparked a massive land war. Also under represented in the story was that the US Silent Service. The submarines of other fleets were remarkably more successful and survivable than American boats.
In addition, the crucial plot element of the decisive cyber-strike on US Naval computer-based systems was not realistic. In fact, it was almost magical. IRL, a crippling cyber-strike capability would be a one trick pony. Hacks are like magic tricks. A good-as or better magician once they know of a trick—can figure it out. The best Chinese and Indian software folks are no better than the best Americans. The incapacitating hack or hacks would be quickly diagnosable, and patched. Those patches would be tested, before putting sailors back in harms way. However, it was a much better story for the Navy to stop using computers, and for the US to never have figured out, “How did they do that?” Finally, given that the Chinese had suborned so many military systems,
I also found the politics of the story to be very contrived. At the very beginning they were right out of the daily news feed. The Chinese pressure on nations bordering the South China Sea was realistic and contemporary. So was the Chinese pressure on Taiwan. The American response and the Russian and Iranians taking advantage of the situation in some way was also credible. It was downhill from there. . That the story ended with the However, I understood the purpose of the ending political situation was there to forward the authors’ theses.
This book was a hybrid-fiction/non-fiction work. At heart its about how unknown unknowns can topple a well ensconced leader. Putting aside the techno-bling of future air/ sea/cyber/ warfare it was pretty thin soup. Five POVs starved the characters of development. There were too few pages for them to be anything but stereotypical. Note that the authors ignored certain aspects of American war fighting doctrine and available war fighting resources to make a better war story on the Pacific’s surface. There were numerous plot holes, particularly with technology and how tech-savvy folks approach 'technical' challenges. They went against the 'realistic' grain of the overall book. There was a lot of exposition. I could not avoid thinking the basic themes of the book were pessimistic and too contrived. However, if you’re a MIL-tech geek into modern war pr0n this would be a decent beach read. Although, this book was of the category, where the individual trees were of more value than the forest.
I recommend reading Asia's Cauldron: The South China Sea and the End of a Stable Pacific (my review) and [b:Red Storm Rising|318525|Red Storm Rising|Tom Clancy|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1173729031l/318525._SY75_.jpg|5054712] to which this book owes its naval roots ahead of this book.
McDonnell-Douglas F/A-18 Hornet—Still serving in 2034. First flown in 1980, a 54-year old aircraft.
My audiobook was 10-hours, 49-minutes long. A dead tree copy would be a modest 230-pages. The book had a US 2021 copyright. The audio book had five (5) narrators: Emilly Woo Zeller, P.J. Ochlan, Vicas Adam, Dion Graham, and Feodor Chin voicing the story’s ensemble cast of characters.
This book was co-authored. James Stavridis is a retired United States Navy admiral, currently involved in numerous high-level commercial, academic and media positions. He is the author of about ten (10) non-fiction books on military and political topics. Elliot Ackerman is an American author and former Marine Corps officer. He is the author of five works of fiction. This is the first book I've read by either author.
Firstly, it is not completely necessary to have any previous: military, military history, geography or technology background to be reading this book. However, it would be helpful to have a Popular Mechanics-level understanding of contemporary military systems, a familiarly with military and both PRC and US political organization, and a grasp of Western Pacific Ocean and South Asian, as well as Iranian politics and geography.
Secondly, I have spent several years amongst U.S. and allied soldiers, sailors and airmen, both officers and rankers. I’m also familiar with several US weapon systems, a scant few of which appeared in the narrative. I also fancy myself an amateur military historian and armchair
This book was part of the long tradition of modern, hypothetical wars, military fiction first made recently popular in the 1980’s by books like John W. Hackett’s [b:The Third World War: August 1985|1375759|The Third World War August 1985|John W. Hackett|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1183080736l/1375759._SX50_.jpg|1365663] and Tom Clancy’s Red Storm Rising. These genre-books include a detailed military narrative of a future war against the West’s (typically American) then-current geopolitical rivals. Military technology, soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, as well as politicians and political leaders are deeply woven into the story.
Finally, this book likely came into shape in 2020, two years before the Russian Federation’s 2022 invasion of the Ukraine. In the story, the octogenarian Vladimir Putin is still the Russian president in 2034. Russian actions in the story are likewise in-line with recent history.
TL;DR Review
This is how The American Century ends. In the story, there was a Sino-American Great Politics Mess-Up over territorial claims in the South China Sea. This results in a cyber coup de main where modern naval tactical and operational warfare ensues. The US military computer-based systems are revealed to have been thoroughly pwned by the PRC. Meanwhile, Russian and Iranian malfeasance, and combatant governmental miscalculation propel an ‘incident’ into tactical nuclear exchanges between the PRC and USA. The story ends through an unexpected great power intervention to forestall Armageddon which changes the global Balance of Power. The geopolitics of the story were too contrived once past their grounding in the present. Some operational aspects of the combat sidestepped national military doctrine(s) to cater to a better naval combat centered story. However, the combat vignettes were good, albeit brief. The machinations and the exposed flaws Inherent in the System of government of both the US and PRC were more detailed. The authors were too heavy-handed in the lessons learnt. The story illustrated (to me) that, With Great Power Comes Great Insanity.
The Review
Writing was technically good. Descriptive prose was written in a clear, unaffected manner. A competent, details oriented, ‘writing team’ typically produces a well-groomed narrative. The narrative contains a moderate amount of details in scenes on both sides of the conflict. Dialog, at least that related to action scenes was good too. However, I thought the prose meant to elicit emotional impact to be too melodramatic.
In addition, be prepared for an over-use of martial quotations from: Napoleon, Sun-Tzu, Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Abraham Lincoln, etc. Oddly, I don’t recall any American admirals or generals being quoted? I have also left the reader of this review a few quotes I favor.
I had a several real issues with the prose.
Firstly, the characters felt very flat. This was an artifact of the very short, chapters with changing POVs and only a modest number of pages. It did not leave a lot pages for character development, nor did they give me time to become invested in most of them.
Secondly, there was a lot of exposition. This was an advantage in the cut ‘n dried techo-political plotlines. However, the narrative fell flat when attempting to describe emotional relationships other than the “comrades-in-arms” type. Male, female relationships (all relationships were heterosexual) came out as too on the nose.
Finally, as previously written, I have spent some time in the company of ranker: soldiers, sailors and Marines. The lowest ranking member of the US Armed forces receiving any real notice in the prose was a Chief Petty Officer. This story was "the view from above". The lowest rank contributing a POV was a Marine Major. Most were or soon to be admirals. The politicians and governmental office holders were of likewise rarified office appointed or elected.
Two Indians, five Chinese, five Americans, A Russian and an Iranian character carry the story. However, five of the characters provided POVs. Note that in my audio book with its five (5) narrators, each narrator ‘did’ one character. I'll write this again,"Five POVs was too many POVs in the story". Each POV was there to demonstrate an aspect of the conflict. Frankly, there were two (2), perhaps three (3) too many POVs? Except for one, none of them received the development needed.
First amongst equals protagonist-wise was Marine Maj. Chris “Wedge” Mitchell. He was the anchoring USMC POV. He’s a pilot from a family of Marine aviators. Mitchell received the most development of all the characters. He's a warrior and a pilot. He was the tragic, Action Hero. Sandeep "Sandy" Chowdhury is Mitchell’s opposite. He’s a first-generation Indo-American, policy-wonk on the National Security Council. Chowdhury is the Indo-American every man in the White House who sees the situation clearer than his superiors, but is discounted. Chowdhury is also there to anchor the authors' Pro-immigrant theme. He was the Cowardly Lion. Commodore Sarah Hunt, later Admiral Hunt, provides insight into the operational aspects of the conflict. She also adds the woman’s perspective of it and a naval career leading to high rank. She was the woman successful in a man's world, but doubting her success as a woman. Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Farshad provides the second-world perspective to the conflict. He was the warrior who found peace. Chinese Admiral Lin Bao, is the PRC’s expert on Americans, being half-American and graduate of both Harvard Kennedy School of Government and the U.S. Naval War College. Bao provides the PRC military contrast to the U.S. admirals. He was the Gentleman and a Scholar fall guy.
The antagonists include the PRC’s Central Political Bureau, the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, and the still ruling despot Vladamir Putin. The Bao character is the interface with the Chinese Politburo. The Farshad character is the interface with the Russians through a Russian character intermediary. He is also the Iranian leadership interface. Chowdhury is the interface with the antagonists in the White House. By interface, I mean delivering the exposition needed for a reader to understand the structure of power of the nations involved.
The final chapter, “Coda: The Horizon”, was a terribly awkward attempt at The Summation trope, from the surviving POVs. It was the schmaltziest of chapters that had verged on schmaltz throughout.
The book contained no sex, a small amount of drugs, and a small amount of music references. (That's, sex, drugs, and rock 'n roll.) There was a lot of violence, including torture. Alcohol was the only drug consumed. That was in moderation. Music references came from references to background music. Oddly, traditional Indian music received more attention than western. Violence was: physical, small arms, and military heavy weapons. Violence was not gory and only mildly descriptive. Although, there was a particularly descriptive scene with violence against animals. As in many thrillers, the POV contributing protagonists had remarkable stamina and healing capability. Body count was high. (There was a war on.)
There were no maps included in the book, not that I expected them with an audio book. Yet, there should have been maps. I found myself using Google Earth to keep pace with the narrative and to access the terrain. For example: South China Sea.
“Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.”
-- General Omar Bradley US Army
I also found the time/space aspect of the plot to be suspect. Events did not take into account the vast distances of the Pacific or the friction of wartime conditions on operations. This was all very surprising to me considering the authors' military credentials?
For example,
Spoiler
Lin Bao leaves command of the Zheng He off-shore of Taiwan on 6 July supporting the invasion of that island. The Zheng He participates on a nuclear strike on San Diego on 29 July. That's 23 days. Its about 11,100 km from Taipei to San Diego. For reference, a cargo vessel takes 12-16 days (weather dependent) to make that trip. That's a direct, least distance crossing. The Zheng He's carrier battle group would need to plan and execute that strike on San Diego in three weeks (23 days) coming from a combat engagement. That includes: refit and reprovision and stealthily cross the Pacific, while presumably taking anti-submarine precautions. Note the 'stealthy' approach to avoid observation on the shorter sea lanes, while continuously taking anti-submarine countermeasures could easily double the direct route travel time. Also, provisioning a battle group depleted from supporting an amphibious invasion of a hostile shore is not an 'overnight' task.Frankly, I was greatly surprised the Chinese were not intercepted by American submarines before reaching the North American shore. I would have expected one or a pair of Chinese Shang-class SSNs (Type 093) to have launched a newly developed naval version of the DF-10 long-range land-attack cruise missile. This would not have risked the Chinese surface battlegroup, prudently maintaining them as a fleet-in-being in the relative safety of the western pacific. Also, the naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii would have made a better target than the San Diego naval base. However, The Admiral needed a better story, not a more realistic war?
First and foremost, this story was a story of disruptive technology. Another is that miscalculation, and plain bad luck are endemic to war plans. (I was surprised the authors missed the opportunity to quote Helmuth von Moltke?) Also that opportunist adversaries of the U.S. like the Chinese, Russians and Iranians are likely to play important roles in widening confrontations. Unlike many techno-fests of this genre, the story wasn’t completely there to support the military hardware. In fact, the US’s military hardware was its greatest liability. The real message of the story was, “Asia is rising. The wealth and power of the US are in relative decline.” The subtext was, “Fighting a war with China would be a disaster”
Having written that, the levels of detail were only moderate. The weapons, combat systems and the doctrine applied were very correct. For example, the cyber-attack on some elements of the US Command and Control infrastructure used all the correct terminology and was a textbook example of what could be accomplished by a well-resourced and determined aggressor.
While I thought the guns, drums, smoke, and bugles were good, I also thought the authors took liberties to bend their story to be an epic Pacific air/surface (sea) combat story ala WWII in the Pacific Theater. Inconvenient to the authors’ story were the US Army, Air Force and most of the Marine Corps. While Marine air featured in the story, no Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) were deployed. In general, there was no ground combat by US forces in the narrative. Strategically, the opportunist assault by the
Spoiler
Russians in PolandIn addition, the crucial plot element of the decisive cyber-strike on US Naval computer-based systems was not realistic. In fact, it was almost magical. IRL, a crippling cyber-strike capability would be a one trick pony. Hacks are like magic tricks. A good-as or better magician once they know of a trick—can figure it out. The best Chinese and Indian software folks are no better than the best Americans. The incapacitating hack or hacks would be quickly diagnosable, and patched. Those patches would be tested, before putting sailors back in harms way. However, it was a much better story for the Navy to stop using computers, and for the US to never have figured out, “How did they do that?” Finally, given that the Chinese had suborned so many military systems,
Spoiler
why did the Americans believe their strategic nuclear weapons had not been pwned too?I also found the politics of the story to be very contrived. At the very beginning they were right out of the daily news feed. The Chinese pressure on nations bordering the South China Sea was realistic and contemporary. So was the Chinese pressure on Taiwan. The American response and the Russian and Iranians taking advantage of the situation in some way was also credible. It was downhill from there. . That the story ended with the
Spoiler
South China Sea returning to the status quo ante bellum while the US devolved into a great power with a big radiation and internal refugee problem and no longer a super power. What state China was left in, which suffered more from the war going nuclear, was left to the reader’s imagination."Politics is the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn't happen."
— Winston Churchill
This book was a hybrid-fiction/non-fiction work. At heart its about how unknown unknowns can topple a well ensconced leader. Putting aside the techno-bling of future air/ sea/cyber/ warfare it was pretty thin soup. Five POVs starved the characters of development. There were too few pages for them to be anything but stereotypical. Note that the authors ignored certain aspects of American war fighting doctrine and available war fighting resources to make a better war story on the Pacific’s surface. There were numerous plot holes, particularly with technology and how tech-savvy folks approach 'technical' challenges. They went against the 'realistic' grain of the overall book. There was a lot of exposition. I could not avoid thinking the basic themes of the book were pessimistic and too contrived. However, if you’re a MIL-tech geek into modern war pr0n this would be a decent beach read. Although, this book was of the category, where the individual trees were of more value than the forest.
I recommend reading Asia's Cauldron: The South China Sea and the End of a Stable Pacific (my review) and [b:Red Storm Rising|318525|Red Storm Rising|Tom Clancy|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1173729031l/318525._SY75_.jpg|5054712] to which this book owes its naval roots ahead of this book.
adventurous
dark
informative
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I admit, I was disappointed by this book. I *loved* Ghost Fleet, and saw this as another opportunity for that kind of in depth vision of the near future of warfare. This book hit with broad strokes on a near future theater security vision. Without spoilers, I'll just say that this kind of future planning involves, at its core, an assessment of the likeliest adversary threats, the key influences that will restrain or aid in handling those threats, and the types of platforms and weapons and resources and skill sets that are likely to matter. The first half of this book (the part published in WIRED) showed promise, and the rest of the book did portray these considerations. But, it didn't do so with much depth or nuance, and the story fell flat for me in the second half. Glad I read it though - it did offer food for thought!