Mohsin Ali

John Boyd and his adherents can be remembered in many ways. According to some narrators, they were responsible for a new art of war, often referred to as maneuver warfare. Others portray them as weak characters who reshaped the work of other theorists like Basil Liddell Hart and John Frederick Fuller, using quotes, arguments, and chronological patterns to apply them to other matters and explain them in their own ways. However, irrespective of the narratives, many writings regarding Boyd have argued that the ideas and concepts developed by him and his disciples were valuable and practical. Stephen Robinson, in the book, “The Blind Strategist: John Boyd and the American Art of War,” has disagreed with this fundamental hypothesis. Stephen Robinson is an officer in the Australian Army Reserve and has served as an instructor at the Royal Military College. The book’s central argument is that the maneuver warfare developed by Boyd and his allies led the US forces astray. The examples drawn from history were flawed, based on the absolute lies of Nazi generals and misunderstood perspectives from the past. Also, it includ-ed much overlooked and miscalculated data, contrary to maneuver warfare theory. More on: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377728905_Book_Review-The_Blind_Strategist_John_Boyd_and_the_American_Art_of_War_Stephen_Robinson?_sg=yLxwafBcBwGl5jIGKVdzmkILhFz-wbjuMjchbtADwgmmL9kzKAw7yWYkiAMJ8imhtEy6MgWGz-h1kSQ&_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QifX0