The siege of Tobruk was a pivotal battle which influenced the outcome of the Second World War. In this book Robert Lyman describes the 'David versus Goliath' confrontation that ensued when Allied forces took on Rommel's Panzer divisions in the Libyan port.

“[A] vivid and engrossing study of slavery in and around one of its trading hubs, Charleston, SC . . . an important contribution to Southern antebellum history.” —Library Journal In America’s Longest Siege, historian Joseph Kelly captures the toxic mix of nationalism, paternalism, and wealth that made Charleston the center of the nationwide debate over slavery and the tragic act of secession that doomed both the city and the South. Thoroughly researched and compulsively readable, America’s Longest Siege offers a new take on the Civil War and the culture that made it inevitable. “Lays bare the decades-long campaign of rationalization and intimidation that revivified and reinforced the institution of slavery and dragged the United States into disunion and civil war . . . this masterful study is a timely and important reminder of the consequences that result when ideological extremists succeed in drowning out the voices of reason.” —Peter Quinn, author of Hour of the Cat

In 1864 General Ulysses S. Grant decided to strangle the life out of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia by surrounding the city of Petersburg and cutting off General Robert E. Lee's supply lines. The ensuing siege would carry on for nearly ten months, involve 160,000 soldiers, and see a number of pitched battles including the Battle of the Crater, Reams Station, Hatcher's Run, and White Oak Road. After nearly ten months, Grant launched an attack that sent the Confederate army scrambling back to Appomattox Court House where it would soon surrender. Written by an expert on the American Civil War, this book examines the last clash between the armies of U.S. Grant and Robert E. Lee.

Lasting nine weeks in 1781, the Battle of Pensacola was the conclusion of Spain's aggressive military campaign to seize the Gulf Coast from Great Britain. Drawing from a variety of sources, Wesley S. Odom's The Longest Siege of the American Revolution: Pensacola, provides the most comprehensive and analytical look at this obscure but decisive battle. Complete with previously unpublished maps, artwork and detailed chronology, this historic account is thrilling and insightful.

During the Civil War, control of the Mississippi River was hotly contested by both the Union and Confederate armies. By late 1862, the South held only a 110-mile stretch of this vital waterway. Determined to defend this critical span, the Confederacy built two fortresses to defend it--Vicksburg on the north end, Port Hudson on the south. Drawing on the letters and memoirs of soldiers and officers on both sides, this book chronicles the brutal struggle for Port Hudson, Louisiana, beginning with Admiral Farragut's costly naval attack by the Union fleet, through the furious infantry assaults ordered by General Nathaniel Banks--including the first charge made by black troops in the Civil War--and finally to the 48-day siege itself. Among the most tragic campaigns of the war, it is recognized by historians as the longest siege in American military history.

Kut-al-Amara was the site of one of the longest sieges ever endured by British forces. On December 3, 1915, the 6th Indian Division under Charles Townshend sought refuge from pursuing Turkish forces inside the walled town. With no heavy artillery to destroy fortifications, the Turks circled the town, subjecting it to intermittent shelling, small arms fire, and infantry attacks. British relief units made repeated attempts to break through the Turkish lines. Meanwhile, within Kut-al-Amara a different sort of war was going on. Townshend's division was made up of Muslim sepoys, who had misgivings about fighting the Turks. Not only were the Turks fellow Muslims but they served the Ottoman Sultan, recognized by many as the Caliph, the spiritual and temporal head of Islam. The Turks played upon this potentially divided loyalty with a propaganda campaign intended to encourage desertion. Then, when a shortage of food forced the garrison to supplement its rations with horsemeat, Muslim and Hindu soldiers were faced with violating dietary restrictions in order to survive. For British officers, prolonging the defense of Kut was complicated by the need to combat disaffection and starvation among the Indian rank and file. A significant event in the British campaign in Mesopotamia, the Siege of Kut-al-Amara offers important insights into Britain's imperial army and its role in the Middle East during World War I.

At seven o'clock in the morning on February 21, 1916, the ground in northern France began to shake. For the next ten hours, twelve hundred German guns showered shells on a salient in French lines. The massive weight of explosives collapsed dugouts, obliterated trenches, severed communication wires, and drove men mad. As the barrage lifted, German troops moved forward, darting from shell crater to shell crater. The battle of Verdun had begun. In Verdun, historian Paul Jankowski provides the definitive account of the iconic battle of World War I. A leading expert on the French past, Jankowski combines the best of traditional military history-its emphasis on leaders, plans, technology, and the contingency of combat-with the newer social and cultural approach, stressing the soldier's experience, the institutional structures of the military, and the impact of war on national memory. Unusually, this book draws on deep research in French and German archives; this mastery of sources in both languages gives Verdun unprecedented authority and scope. In many ways, Jankowski writes, the battle represents a conundrum. It has an almost unique status among the battles of the Great War; and yet, he argues, it was not decisive, sparked no political changes, and was not even the bloodiest episode of the conflict. It is said that Verdun made France, he writes; but the question should be, What did France make of Verdun? Over time, it proved to be the last great victory of French arms, standing on their own. And, for France and Germany, the battle would symbolize the terror of industrialized warfare, "a technocratic Moloch devouring its children," where no advance or retreat was possible, yet national resources poured in ceaselessly, perpetuating slaughter indefinitely.