- administrator -

Comment (03)

  1. This review concludes that the book is ‘useful if you have no knowledge of the conflict and hate Wikipedia’.

    Well, I beg to differ!

    There are several other options available between this book and Wikipedia (!).

    (I sometimes wonder if the historical background in some wargames magazine articles is just a paraphrase of Wikipedia!).

    Sadly the reviewer seems to be unaware of the four-volume history of the Iran-Iraq war recently published by Helion & Co, who have been actively promoting their books for wargamers.

    (I first came across Helion at the trade stand they had at one of the Hammerhead wargame shows in Newark):

    The full four-volume set would involve an investment of almost £80, but they are comprehensive and authoritative.

    These books have already received positive reviews in Military Modelling and Miniature Wargames, among others:

    http://www.helion.co.uk/browse-title-series-more/middleeastatwar-series/books-in-series/the-iran-iraq-war-volume-1-the-battle-for-khuzestan-september-1980-may-1982.html

    Harvard University Press has published an English translation of a single volume French language history of the war including many maps:

    http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674088634&content=toc

    Finally, for something more concise and accessible, there is also an Osprey ‘essential history’ written by Efraim Karsh (who wrote a scholarly biography of Saddam Hussein many years ago):

    https://ospreypublishing.com/the-iran-iraq-war-1980-1988-pb

    If Wargames Illustrated would like a book reviewer willing to look beyond Wikipedia then I would be glad to write for you.

    Please find a link to some of my academic books reviews at my Academia.edu profile (below).

    • Hi Daniel,

      The reviewer does suggest that this is a brief guide rather than an in depth study. I am sure that the texts and works you have mentioned have much more to offer, but this particular one was the book under review. It therefore follows that the reviewer commented upon that as an option rather than as a fait accompli.

      Have you previously submitted a review to us? If so, please feel free to do so, no more than 300 words, using one of the texts you mentioned, and we’d be more than happy to consider it.

      Kindest regards,

      Wayne

    • Well Daniel, you gave me more positive content, than the review of Mark, maybe his comfort zone is more in evaluating models.

Leave a Reply to Daniel Bamford Cancel reply

Top