For the Common Defense: A Military History of the United States from 1607 to 2012

This fascinating study examines Ameircan military history from the Pilgrims of the 17th century to the Gulf War. Although published in 1994 and thus not covering the war in Afghanistan or the second invasion of Iraq, this book presents a fascinating analysis of American military history. It examines the size of the army and the role of militias and the national guard. A brilliant history that tells the tale of the American military and the nature of common defense, the older system of defending America when it was still a simple agrarian country. Seth J. Frantzman

I first purchased this book for a military history class at my college. The book appears intimidating at first glance due to its size. The text really is quite interesting, however, and I found it is not difficult reading. The author does an excellent job at giving a chronological history at America's beginning with the first concepts of a militia and military. All of the major skirmishes, battles and wars are covered as well as a bit of political information. I appreciated the author's conclusive points at the end of each chapter by stating what significance came of the event both militarily and socially or politically. Definitely a text worth keeping after the class is over.

I wish more people, especially members of the media, would read this non political survey of U.S. military history from the early 1600s beginnings of English settlement to the collapse of the Soviet Union and Desert Storm, with extensive bibliographies. This is an excellent map for the beginning student of our military history, charting the territory. It can help us avoid taking too short-term a perspective on current events. Without this grounding it's easy to believe our current challenges are new. They're not. The U.S. has faced constantly changing threats throughout its history, even as the country itself has continuously changed. U.S. military strength has always fluctuated, expanding in times of threat & contracting in peace. We have gone to war ill-prepared, then triumphed after spectacular military build-up. We have been in a near constant state of preparing for war, fighting war or recovering from war. Public opinion has usually been divided, including going into the world wars. War has always had collateral damage. It has actually become considerably LESS unpleasant as technology & strategy have advanced. The Civil War, World War I & some battles of World War II were barbaric compared with anything we've seen recently. Our military has made vital contributions to our economy, technological advance, education and civil rights. Minorities, especially blacks & Native Americans, have played vital roles in our military throughout our history. The perspective given by Allan R. Millett & Peter Maslowski raises questions such as how could guerrilla warfare be described as a "new" challenge? Guerrilla warfare has been an issue since the Revolution. We ought have a good grasp on it by now. The book's weaknesses are mostly attributable to it being an ambitious survey. They include gaps in coverage (how did we get from post Vietnam demoralization to Cold War victory?) It's long on facts, short on explanation and analysis (WHY did the Soviets collapse? WHY did we succeed?) It's necessarily superficial & doesn't probe controversy deeply (there's scant attention to the U.S. relationships with Saudi Arabia or Israel). On the other hand, the book is very good on the relationship between the U.S. & the U.K. It's surprising how late (going into World War I) Britain was still regarded with wariness. The book is thought-provoking on the unattractiveness (similar to Russia) of the U.S. as an invasion prospect. It also puts into perspective the claim that the U.S. never invades other countries (we've been invading throughout our history). The book is quite good on the relationship between civilian authorities & the military, on the evolution of military management (professionalization is not a new concept) & on the rise of air power. It also touches on nonfiring Soldiers, an important issue excellently addressed in Lt. Col. Dave Grossman's "On Killing." In the context provided by this book, it's abundantly clear talk of a "peace dividend" &

I took Maslowski's history class about the U.S. military after 1917 at the University of Nebraska in 2001. "For the Common Defense" was one of the required readings for his class. If you have the chance to take his class, do it, it's informative and entertaining. When most history books just look at the battle statistics and "who did what," Maslowski and Millet's book goes further to illustrate the influence that politicians had on the military establishment. Most students sell their books back to the bookstore when they are done with the class--I decided to keep mine.