What do you think?
Rate this book
A Handful of Hard Men: The SAS and the Battle for Rhodesia
A biography of a Special Forces soldier who battled the forces of Mugabe and Nkomo, earning a reputation as a military maestro. During the West’s great transition into the post-colonial age, the country of Rhodesia refused to succumb quietly, and throughout the 1970s, fought back almost alone against Communist-supported elements that it did not believe would deliver proper governance. During this long war, many heroes emerged, but none more skillful and courageous than Capt. Darrell Watt of the Rhodesian SAS, who placed himself at the tip of the spear in the deadly battle to resist the forces of Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo. It is difficult to find another soldier’s story to equal Watt’s in terms of time spent on the field of battle and challenges faced. Even by the lofty standards of the SAS and Special Forces, one has to look far to find anyone who can match his record of resilience and valor in the face of such daunting odds and with resources so paltry. A bush-lore genius, blessed with uncanny instincts and an unbridled determination, he had no peers as a combat-tracker—and there was plenty of competition. The Rhodesian theater was a fluid and volatile one, in which he performed in almost every imaginable fighting as an airborne shock-trooper leading camp attacks, long range reconnaissance operator, covert urban operator, sniper, saboteur, seek-and-strike expert, and, in the final stages, as a key figure in mobilizing an allied army in neighboring Mozambique. After twelve years in the cauldron of war, his cause slipped from beneath him, however, and Rhodesia gave way to Zimbabwe. When the guns went quiet, Watt had won all his battles but lost the war. In this fascinating biography we learn that in his later years, he turned to saving wildlife on a continent where animals are in continued danger, devoting himself to both the fauna and African people he has cared so deeply about.
277 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 31, 2015
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 72 reviews
February 5, 2018
I am saddened that I could only give this book 5 stars - it deserves more.
I have always been interested in the South African bush wars and the insurgency and sadly, downfall of Rhodesia. Recently I have had the opportunity to focus my reading on this conflict and I can say undoubtedly, that this is one of the best books on the subject I could have hoped to read. Not only that, but as an avid military history buff, this book stands out by far as one of the best military history books of any modern day conflict I have ever read.
Aside from the perhaps unfortunate name, the book does a brilliant job of blending the first hand accounts of action throughout the conflict and tempers it with the very relevant background political motivations and wranglings that were happening. I found that part of the story really laid the groundwork for understanding why certain actions or operations took place or, how certain actions shaped the negotiations. It was really a fascinating and sad, sad story of betrayal and a beautiful country lost.
I have always been interested in the South African bush wars and the insurgency and sadly, downfall of Rhodesia. Recently I have had the opportunity to focus my reading on this conflict and I can say undoubtedly, that this is one of the best books on the subject I could have hoped to read. Not only that, but as an avid military history buff, this book stands out by far as one of the best military history books of any modern day conflict I have ever read.
Aside from the perhaps unfortunate name, the book does a brilliant job of blending the first hand accounts of action throughout the conflict and tempers it with the very relevant background political motivations and wranglings that were happening. I found that part of the story really laid the groundwork for understanding why certain actions or operations took place or, how certain actions shaped the negotiations. It was really a fascinating and sad, sad story of betrayal and a beautiful country lost.
February 7, 2023
Some history books are written with first hand narrative to support the history being presented. Other books use history to set the background for the first hand accounts being described. This book falls into the later category. There is limited copy given to the backdrop of Rhodesian social and political events that created the climate for the insurgency.
This lack of historical backdrop shouldn't be much of a detractor as the focus of the writing was the warfighter and specifically the Rhodesian SAS teams. The first hand accounts in A Handful of Hard Men: The SAS and the Battle for Rhodesia are intense, astonishing, heart breaking and sometimes down right hilarious when men need to find release to the pressures of constant war.
I do believe the narrative suffers from indecision. The book begins by providing the history of D. Watts, famous Rhodesian SAS operative, which leads the reader to believe Watts is the subject of the book. Then moves to events where Watts isn't involved only to come back to Watts again, move away again, and finally focus on Watts for the remainder of the book. This is a minor pinch point, but coupled with the narrative moving back and forth in time and the scarcity of details to connect dots can result in the reader's frustration with keeping everything straight between people and timeframes.
This lack of historical backdrop shouldn't be much of a detractor as the focus of the writing was the warfighter and specifically the Rhodesian SAS teams. The first hand accounts in A Handful of Hard Men: The SAS and the Battle for Rhodesia are intense, astonishing, heart breaking and sometimes down right hilarious when men need to find release to the pressures of constant war.
I do believe the narrative suffers from indecision. The book begins by providing the history of D. Watts, famous Rhodesian SAS operative, which leads the reader to believe Watts is the subject of the book. Then moves to events where Watts isn't involved only to come back to Watts again, move away again, and finally focus on Watts for the remainder of the book. This is a minor pinch point, but coupled with the narrative moving back and forth in time and the scarcity of details to connect dots can result in the reader's frustration with keeping everything straight between people and timeframes.
June 22, 2020
This book does a wonderful job of telling the story of Rhodesia through the eyes of a soldier. The strength and resolve of the SAS is told through accounts of various engagements that took place across the over decade-long struggle. The book, several times, shifts to update the changing political landscape surrounding the war which is nice for context. It’s a shame to know that no matter how well the men of the SAS fought, they were still at the mercy of politics. The book mainly follows the story of Darrell Watt, an extremely skilled tracker and hunter, who used his bush skills to great effectiveness in battle. It also tells the stories of several other soldiers in the SAS which can sometimes be confusing as Wessels jumps from account to account. Nevertheless, “A Handful of Hard Men” is an extremely engaging read for someone who enjoys military history. A bit like rewatching a tragic movie, reading this book invokes thoughts of “maybe they will overcome” or “perhaps they will win this time” even though you know that it will end in tragedy. Wessels does an excellent job of giving credit to the brave men who fought so hard for the home that they loved. A shame that so many of them were unrecognized in their struggle. A telling story of patriotism, brotherhood, duty, and resolve, “A Handful of Hard Men” encapsulates a fighting spirit and speaks true to the statement “Rhodesians Never Die”.
December 27, 2022
This is one of the best action-adventure-war packed material i have ever read , and the crazy part is that its all there , its real , every bit happened as it was , coming from the reports of the participants (mostly SAS Rhodesian forces).
For the gamer readers, this is some real life Farcry (pc game saga).
Highly trained exceptionally motivated operatives facing opponents orders of magnitude greater , deep behind enemy lines , a report full of sabotaging , assaults, antitracking , hunting.
Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) was founded by South African colonists in 1890 and flourished immensely in the span of not even 50 years.The country similar to South Africa prospered under white rule having build modern infrastructure , modern services and its people(including the blacks) living a decent and peaceful life.
Despite the fact that its soldiers proved themselves time and time again in special operations for Great Britain during WW1 , WW2 , Korea , the brits were some asshole backstsbbers.
Starting with the 60's The Brits wanted to get rid off their aura of colonialists and paddled forth to give all their former colonies independence.
In the case of Rhodesia this obsession with cleaning out white rule proved one of their biggest mistakes for the time to come. They backed Robert Mugabe leader of revolutionary armies which in fact were terrorist organizations killing unarmed white farmers throughout the country (ZANU, ZANLU, ZIPRA).
British diplomats as well as high profile leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, just didn't care Mugabe's men were murdering innocent farmers and entire families , butchering small kids... All they saw was "white rule must go".
Therefore Rhodesians declared independence and started a long bush war which would last almost 14 years (1965-1979) against huge overwhelming odds against thousands and thousands of terrorists coming from most neuighbouring countries like Zambia, Mozambique, Botswana.
The west put embargoes on Rhodesians while the terorrists were heavy receivers of Soviet help in the help of weapons , training , food .
Depsite all this , Rhodesian SAS operators won every single fight using remarkable bushcraft , tracking , persistence , zeal , courage and ingeniunity. These men would carry tens of kgs of equipment in everything worse Africa can offer (heat, humidity, giant predators, snakes) and behind enemy lines operations , marching tens of kms daily sometimes without/or with scarce water and food , always heavilly outnumbered and outgunned , with militias on their rear trying to find and eliminate them.
Probably one of the most impressive battles was 150 SAS troops invading a 10000 strong terrorist camp and efeectively obliterating it.
Rhodesians won every battle and lost the war due to political incompetence of their superior political stuff which bended the knee to the brits...which endorsed Mugabe. Now the country having all whites deported or left is in shambles , basic services are nowhere in sight, another failed state.
A sad story in the end but a wonderful book !
I learned a quite alot about life in the Zambezi basin, history and geopolitics of Zimbabwe, Botswana, Zambia , a bit of Tanzania and quite alot about the portugesse rule as well as its downfall of Mozambique.
For the gamer readers, this is some real life Farcry (pc game saga).
Highly trained exceptionally motivated operatives facing opponents orders of magnitude greater , deep behind enemy lines , a report full of sabotaging , assaults, antitracking , hunting.
Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) was founded by South African colonists in 1890 and flourished immensely in the span of not even 50 years.The country similar to South Africa prospered under white rule having build modern infrastructure , modern services and its people(including the blacks) living a decent and peaceful life.
Despite the fact that its soldiers proved themselves time and time again in special operations for Great Britain during WW1 , WW2 , Korea , the brits were some asshole backstsbbers.
Starting with the 60's The Brits wanted to get rid off their aura of colonialists and paddled forth to give all their former colonies independence.
In the case of Rhodesia this obsession with cleaning out white rule proved one of their biggest mistakes for the time to come. They backed Robert Mugabe leader of revolutionary armies which in fact were terrorist organizations killing unarmed white farmers throughout the country (ZANU, ZANLU, ZIPRA).
British diplomats as well as high profile leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, just didn't care Mugabe's men were murdering innocent farmers and entire families , butchering small kids... All they saw was "white rule must go".
Therefore Rhodesians declared independence and started a long bush war which would last almost 14 years (1965-1979) against huge overwhelming odds against thousands and thousands of terrorists coming from most neuighbouring countries like Zambia, Mozambique, Botswana.
The west put embargoes on Rhodesians while the terorrists were heavy receivers of Soviet help in the help of weapons , training , food .
Depsite all this , Rhodesian SAS operators won every single fight using remarkable bushcraft , tracking , persistence , zeal , courage and ingeniunity. These men would carry tens of kgs of equipment in everything worse Africa can offer (heat, humidity, giant predators, snakes) and behind enemy lines operations , marching tens of kms daily sometimes without/or with scarce water and food , always heavilly outnumbered and outgunned , with militias on their rear trying to find and eliminate them.
Probably one of the most impressive battles was 150 SAS troops invading a 10000 strong terrorist camp and efeectively obliterating it.
Rhodesians won every battle and lost the war due to political incompetence of their superior political stuff which bended the knee to the brits...which endorsed Mugabe. Now the country having all whites deported or left is in shambles , basic services are nowhere in sight, another failed state.
A sad story in the end but a wonderful book !
I learned a quite alot about life in the Zambezi basin, history and geopolitics of Zimbabwe, Botswana, Zambia , a bit of Tanzania and quite alot about the portugesse rule as well as its downfall of Mozambique.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 24, 2018
Violent end of Rhodesia raises strong emotions till this day. There's a lot of misinformation, deliberately idealising Rhodesia as a paradise inside of barbaric Africa. This book continues in building that myth and the author, Hannes Wessels, is not even trying to cover his bitterness about the past.
NEVERTHELESS, Wessels offers a unique viewpoint from the turbulent times and can't be dismissed. Aside from the memories of the hair raising military operations, author describes the isolation of Rhodesia, which was abandoned by the British and Americans, while it's enemies were generously supported by the Soviets. Worth a read!
NEVERTHELESS, Wessels offers a unique viewpoint from the turbulent times and can't be dismissed. Aside from the memories of the hair raising military operations, author describes the isolation of Rhodesia, which was abandoned by the British and Americans, while it's enemies were generously supported by the Soviets. Worth a read!
March 11, 2017
The Best book ever !
This is probably one of the best books I have ever read . The author provides an accurate account of the war, the politics behind the war and the key players, however, above all, the author keeps you interested and in suspense all the time. The horror of this war is portrayed better than anything Ive ever read.
This is probably one of the best books I have ever read . The author provides an accurate account of the war, the politics behind the war and the key players, however, above all, the author keeps you interested and in suspense all the time. The horror of this war is portrayed better than anything Ive ever read.
Read
August 30, 2017Insightful
Wow, this amazing story brings back long forgotten memories of home. The tenacity and commitment of Rhodesian soldiers comes through and the achievements were incredible given the political odds.
Stories like this need to be written, "lest we forget".
Wow, this amazing story brings back long forgotten memories of home. The tenacity and commitment of Rhodesian soldiers comes through and the achievements were incredible given the political odds.
Stories like this need to be written, "lest we forget".
February 16, 2019
What could have been
The deceit of the Great Britain political elite will live in infamy. What could have been a model country has become a basket case.
The deceit of the Great Britain political elite will live in infamy. What could have been a model country has become a basket case.
April 18, 2023
Opens up accounts of the bush war from the SAS perspective and is a subject that is not covered to ad nauseam. Genuinely learned new things about the war in Rhodesia, how it was fought and the political context.
Which brings us to my gripe. The book does not even pretend to be an impartial account of the political and social factors at play. Granted a kleptocratic Marxist regime is hardly what the people wanted but the book paints a racially segregated, white rules Rhodesia as a happy and charming place for all. One would let a few statements to this effect slip by, but the nostalgia for this so called golden and happy age wears a little thin. Oh and Rhodesia gets screwed by UK, USA and South Africa over and over again while weak politicians stand in the way of military victory. Just demographically and socially this political conclusion is more than a little naive.
I do understand that this is not intended to be an impartial account and war needs clear enemies who are dehumanized but “gooks” and the matter of fact killing narrative is rather devoid of an in depth analysis.
All that being said, was the book informative and interesting - yes. The narrative loses the plot when switching the point of view and combat is described in a matter of fact manner (where the enemy is mainly cannon fodder like in a video game and the good guys are brave, smart and tenacious). Despite all its faults and shortcomings, I would recommend the book for those interested in military history and on how special forces have been able to make a material impact on the course of a war over an extended period of time. Their professionalism and effectiveness could have been conveyed in a less simplistic manner in a nuanced packages, but the heart of the matter makes up for it.
Which brings us to my gripe. The book does not even pretend to be an impartial account of the political and social factors at play. Granted a kleptocratic Marxist regime is hardly what the people wanted but the book paints a racially segregated, white rules Rhodesia as a happy and charming place for all. One would let a few statements to this effect slip by, but the nostalgia for this so called golden and happy age wears a little thin. Oh and Rhodesia gets screwed by UK, USA and South Africa over and over again while weak politicians stand in the way of military victory. Just demographically and socially this political conclusion is more than a little naive.
I do understand that this is not intended to be an impartial account and war needs clear enemies who are dehumanized but “gooks” and the matter of fact killing narrative is rather devoid of an in depth analysis.
All that being said, was the book informative and interesting - yes. The narrative loses the plot when switching the point of view and combat is described in a matter of fact manner (where the enemy is mainly cannon fodder like in a video game and the good guys are brave, smart and tenacious). Despite all its faults and shortcomings, I would recommend the book for those interested in military history and on how special forces have been able to make a material impact on the course of a war over an extended period of time. Their professionalism and effectiveness could have been conveyed in a less simplistic manner in a nuanced packages, but the heart of the matter makes up for it.
January 17, 2020
I suspect that the standard story of this conflict is heavily slanted, but unfortunately this book feels really slanted in the other direction. The biggest thing that strikes me as implausible here is that over and over he brings up various situations where the soldiers felt that "if we were just allowed to press our advantage, we would have won." Maybe this is true, and it definitely seems like there was a lot of politics going on, but I can't think of a lot of historical examples of countries decisively winning a guerilla war of this nature with tiny forces and huge international pressure against them. It seems like a pretty bold counterfactual to state so many times.
What's good about this book is getting a ground-level look at an unusual subculture in an easily-forgotten aspect of history. There are a lot of war stories that were relatively repetitive but entertaining in their own way, though of course there's a lot of pretty horrific things described here. Interestingly, the terrorists are described as basically inhuman monsters (and it sounds like they really were), but I didn't leave thinking the SAS were exactly angels. Considering they casually talked about wiping out dozens of people, including shooting people in the back while they were running away. From the perspective of, "every one of these people I let go could end up killing a dozen innocents" it makes sense, but they don't even really seem to bother to make that case, it's just natural that they would slaughter the enemy wholesale.
2.5 of 5 stars
What's good about this book is getting a ground-level look at an unusual subculture in an easily-forgotten aspect of history. There are a lot of war stories that were relatively repetitive but entertaining in their own way, though of course there's a lot of pretty horrific things described here. Interestingly, the terrorists are described as basically inhuman monsters (and it sounds like they really were), but I didn't leave thinking the SAS were exactly angels. Considering they casually talked about wiping out dozens of people, including shooting people in the back while they were running away. From the perspective of, "every one of these people I let go could end up killing a dozen innocents" it makes sense, but they don't even really seem to bother to make that case, it's just natural that they would slaughter the enemy wholesale.
2.5 of 5 stars
August 9, 2021
This book is very good, a non stop thriller from beginning to end. This book does a very good job of giving straight up, unbiased information on a country and conflict that is usually either ignored or spun heavily. Give it a read, with an open mind.
There is the Rhodesia and the Bush War that exists both in the minds both of prejudiced men and those of the fanatical leftist. Unfortunately for them, such a Rhodesia never existed. Give this book a read to find out more, and discover a tale of intrigue, betrayal, and a valiant effort to prevent evil.
There is the Rhodesia and the Bush War that exists both in the minds both of prejudiced men and those of the fanatical leftist. Unfortunately for them, such a Rhodesia never existed. Give this book a read to find out more, and discover a tale of intrigue, betrayal, and a valiant effort to prevent evil.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 27, 2021
This history runs the gamut from action-packed, to sad, to enfuriating, to humorous, to outright depressing. The history of Rhodesia can be boiled down to one word, conflict. Like everywhere else in the African bush there's no shortage of savagery. Whether you go in for the marxist propaganda or the white nationalist perspective, there's a clear path of death and destruction leading all the way up to Mugabe and his reign of terror. Particularly, the events of the Vicount flight downing and the massacre of the survivors is one of the toughest stories you could ever hear. Sadly, global politics destroyed a beautiful country and so many lives without much care or thought for those left in the ground along the way.
I also appreciated the sheer level of skill and determination these SAS men exhibited. Surviving in the hot African bush for weeks on practically nothing, including water, is the kind of thing books are written solely about a single such event. These guys were the definition of survivalists.
I also appreciated the sheer level of skill and determination these SAS men exhibited. Surviving in the hot African bush for weeks on practically nothing, including water, is the kind of thing books are written solely about a single such event. These guys were the definition of survivalists.
January 31, 2021
Good for this type of book, but...
I won't repeat the story of what this book is about, but just emphasize that it describes the exploits of soldiers at an operational level through the years of the Rhodesian War. It also provides a version of the chronology of political events, in a similar style that of the rest of the book, so that it appears to have been the version held by most of the characters mentioned in the book.
So far so good. And in its telling of the exploits of the SAS, the author does a good job. Perhaps because because I've read a few of this type of book, it left me dissatisfied. I would have hoped that people in that position would by now be able to give their views on a lot of more difficult questions. As an example I've listed some below:
-Smith's leading of the country into UDI is expressed as being his only option. But was it? Flowers' book suggests otherwise. In general, the coverage of political events is fairly rudimentary.
-How does one reconcile the competing narratives that (1) the terrs were largely untrained and bereft of leadership, and (2) that the Rhodesian forces were amazing efficient? Is it the kill ratios? I cant figure out if most contacts were like shooting fish in a barrel, or not?
-Training: why did the Rhodesians persist with so much square bashing and conventional training when manpower was so critical and the men were being deployed straight into a COIN conflict? A year-long officer's training course? Making badged SAS soldiers joining or rejoining the unit undergo selection again?
-The level of expertise at staff level. Much frustration is expressed in this and other books about the quality of leadership, as well as senior leaders' propensity to get involved in operational matters. The operations of COMOPS doesn't seem as marvelous as the rest of the narrative. I get the impression of a layer of competent officers waiting impatiently to step into the shoes of some dead wood.
-I understand that the Selous Scouts evolved to a point where Ron Reid-Daly was asked to lead the unit, and create a very different identity for it than the SAS. But the amount of overlapping skills and the degree of professional jealousy begs the question of why weren't the Selous Scounts and the SAS more tightly integrated? Did it make sense for such a small army to have 2 units like that? What was the cost of leaving it unresolved?
-Recruitment and integration of black troops. Given the numbers facing Rhodesia, the only way to win the war would be to make it largely a black versus black conflict. Keeping the black troops separate under the RAR and only introducing black officers in 1976 seems to have been shortsighted. Was it the case?
-Counter espionage: the story of the Rhodesian war is riddled with rumours of ops that were stopped or leaked, with the ultimate culprits often seen as South Africa, Britain, Lonrho or others. Leaks have been attributed to the CIO and more specifically to Ken Flower. This whole question deserves thorough study, rather than merely being an aside.
-Thorough coverage of the politics at senior level within the military. Walls in particular seems to have been an interesting but divisive character. Reid-Daly's electronic eavesdropping.
I won't repeat the story of what this book is about, but just emphasize that it describes the exploits of soldiers at an operational level through the years of the Rhodesian War. It also provides a version of the chronology of political events, in a similar style that of the rest of the book, so that it appears to have been the version held by most of the characters mentioned in the book.
So far so good. And in its telling of the exploits of the SAS, the author does a good job. Perhaps because because I've read a few of this type of book, it left me dissatisfied. I would have hoped that people in that position would by now be able to give their views on a lot of more difficult questions. As an example I've listed some below:
-Smith's leading of the country into UDI is expressed as being his only option. But was it? Flowers' book suggests otherwise. In general, the coverage of political events is fairly rudimentary.
-How does one reconcile the competing narratives that (1) the terrs were largely untrained and bereft of leadership, and (2) that the Rhodesian forces were amazing efficient? Is it the kill ratios? I cant figure out if most contacts were like shooting fish in a barrel, or not?
-Training: why did the Rhodesians persist with so much square bashing and conventional training when manpower was so critical and the men were being deployed straight into a COIN conflict? A year-long officer's training course? Making badged SAS soldiers joining or rejoining the unit undergo selection again?
-The level of expertise at staff level. Much frustration is expressed in this and other books about the quality of leadership, as well as senior leaders' propensity to get involved in operational matters. The operations of COMOPS doesn't seem as marvelous as the rest of the narrative. I get the impression of a layer of competent officers waiting impatiently to step into the shoes of some dead wood.
-I understand that the Selous Scouts evolved to a point where Ron Reid-Daly was asked to lead the unit, and create a very different identity for it than the SAS. But the amount of overlapping skills and the degree of professional jealousy begs the question of why weren't the Selous Scounts and the SAS more tightly integrated? Did it make sense for such a small army to have 2 units like that? What was the cost of leaving it unresolved?
-Recruitment and integration of black troops. Given the numbers facing Rhodesia, the only way to win the war would be to make it largely a black versus black conflict. Keeping the black troops separate under the RAR and only introducing black officers in 1976 seems to have been shortsighted. Was it the case?
-Counter espionage: the story of the Rhodesian war is riddled with rumours of ops that were stopped or leaked, with the ultimate culprits often seen as South Africa, Britain, Lonrho or others. Leaks have been attributed to the CIO and more specifically to Ken Flower. This whole question deserves thorough study, rather than merely being an aside.
-Thorough coverage of the politics at senior level within the military. Walls in particular seems to have been an interesting but divisive character. Reid-Daly's electronic eavesdropping.
February 6, 2019
This was a great ground-level account of some of the major events of the Rhodesian Bush War.
The book focuses on Rhodesian SAS Captain Darrell Watt, (who sounded like one hell of an exemplary soldier), but mentions others as well.
"A Handful of Hard Men" talks about some of their major raids, as well as working in slices of the everyday lives of Rhodesian SAS soldiers. There's a great story about a rag-tag band of rescued animals that lived in the troop barracks; a baboon named Enoch, a Zebra named Stripes, two warthogs, and two goats that provided a humorous interlude from all the horror of war the book describes.
The author lays out detailed and horrendous accounts of the downing of two civilian Rhodesian Air Viscount aircraft shot down by Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA) terrorists, and the subsequent massacre of the 10 survivors of one of the crashes (Flight 825), as well as the revenge raid by the SAS that followed. SPOILER: They killed all the terrorists involved.
He also touches on the betrayal of Rhodesia and her interests by Great Britain, although not very deeply.
I enjoyed this book. Especially since books on Rhodesia are few and far between.
I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the Bush War, or Rhodesia in general.
The book focuses on Rhodesian SAS Captain Darrell Watt, (who sounded like one hell of an exemplary soldier), but mentions others as well.
"A Handful of Hard Men" talks about some of their major raids, as well as working in slices of the everyday lives of Rhodesian SAS soldiers. There's a great story about a rag-tag band of rescued animals that lived in the troop barracks; a baboon named Enoch, a Zebra named Stripes, two warthogs, and two goats that provided a humorous interlude from all the horror of war the book describes.
The author lays out detailed and horrendous accounts of the downing of two civilian Rhodesian Air Viscount aircraft shot down by Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA) terrorists, and the subsequent massacre of the 10 survivors of one of the crashes (Flight 825), as well as the revenge raid by the SAS that followed. SPOILER: They killed all the terrorists involved.
He also touches on the betrayal of Rhodesia and her interests by Great Britain, although not very deeply.
I enjoyed this book. Especially since books on Rhodesia are few and far between.
I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the Bush War, or Rhodesia in general.
October 23, 2018
One of the benefits of growing up (basically unsupervised) during the cold war was the total acceptance of hating communists. In fact, while other kids I hung out with wanted to be super heroes or firemen, I fantasized about being a mercenary killing commies in some remote African country. Rhodesia was always fascinating because it became synonymous with the proxy wars of post-colonialism in Africa. This book, told by warriors who were there, is about the 15+ year struggle to save a nation. I never really understood the challenges facing the small nation of Rhodesia, and I certainly never knew what crazy odds the very small army had in front of them. I laughed several times when reading about how a handful of 40+ SAS warriors took on 10,000 troops and kicked their asses. This is a story about a heroism and courage and how dirty politics is nothing new. A great read for the warriors out there or anyone interested in a non-PC point of view.
May 12, 2023
I gave this book two stars because it provided insight into the thinking of those who believed in an independent Rhodesia, and the extent to which they acted upon that belief. According to this account, the war was not only to continue white domination of the majority and growing black population, but also to stem the tide of Marxism taking over the African continent. And the Rhodesian Special Air Service included just the men to do the job, which they take on with what often seems like glee as they go about killing black Africans left, right and centre. No doubt about it, they were excellent soldiers, good at their craft and brave to the extreme. But the fact is, they were on the wrong side of history and demographics. There was never going to be an independent Rhodesia. Many lives were lost, and one might say that the seeds for the tragic beginning of the new country of Zimbabwe were sown in the conflict of which the SAS was a part.
September 29, 2021
Incredible account of some of the hardest blokes to hold a rifle. I’d recommend the actual book in print and not the audiobook. The audiobook completely ruined the story, with an American narrator who struggled to pronounce most of the proper nouns, as well as abruptly stop-starting throughout his entire narration.
August 7, 2024
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, about a time and place which I previously knew very little. This is mostly an oral history of the Rhodesian SAS (special forces). There are a lot of amazing stories - intense training, surviving in the jungle without food or water, having to escape the wild animals of Africa, running into uncivilized tribes that had never seen whites, tracking and ambushing guerilla fighters, and incredible military victories - a hundred men defeating thousands. And it is a touching story, of freedom fighters, terrorist attacks, and civilians massacred.
The author puts these in context by telling the story of Rhodesia. As Americans we grow up with the ideals of democracy - that the best government is that which puts the power in the hands of the populace. Rhodesia challenges that. It was a British colony in Africa where the English colonists set up a country where rule was largely confined to the white minority. This was done not through explicitly racist laws, but requirements of property ownership, etc. The colony brought (or enforced) peace in the area, and brought prosperity. Although the whites were at the top of society, it gave the blacks a standard of living better than pretty much any where else in Africa - and I don't think this is really disputed by anyone. When faced with the decolonization movement of the late 20th century, Rhodesians looked at all the nations around them that had been turned over to black majority rule, and foresaw that would mean confiscation of the fruits of their labor, and poverty and genocide for everyone. They instead chose to declare independence and fight for their country. It would be hard to see any of us making a different choice in the same situation. And they turned out to be right. Rhodesia, one of the best countries in Africa, is now Zimbabwe, one of the worst - for everyone there.
I would be interested to learn more of the story. I believe that when the "right side" looses, it is usually judgment for their transgressions, and so I would like to hear the "other side." Some glimmers of that come through in this book. We hear of SAS troops imbedded to support insurgent forces, and watch as they subject every village that they enter to rape and summary executions. If that is what Rhodesia chose to turn to for survival, had they not abandoned the principles that made them different?
There is profanity throughout.
The author puts these in context by telling the story of Rhodesia. As Americans we grow up with the ideals of democracy - that the best government is that which puts the power in the hands of the populace. Rhodesia challenges that. It was a British colony in Africa where the English colonists set up a country where rule was largely confined to the white minority. This was done not through explicitly racist laws, but requirements of property ownership, etc. The colony brought (or enforced) peace in the area, and brought prosperity. Although the whites were at the top of society, it gave the blacks a standard of living better than pretty much any where else in Africa - and I don't think this is really disputed by anyone. When faced with the decolonization movement of the late 20th century, Rhodesians looked at all the nations around them that had been turned over to black majority rule, and foresaw that would mean confiscation of the fruits of their labor, and poverty and genocide for everyone. They instead chose to declare independence and fight for their country. It would be hard to see any of us making a different choice in the same situation. And they turned out to be right. Rhodesia, one of the best countries in Africa, is now Zimbabwe, one of the worst - for everyone there.
I would be interested to learn more of the story. I believe that when the "right side" looses, it is usually judgment for their transgressions, and so I would like to hear the "other side." Some glimmers of that come through in this book. We hear of SAS troops imbedded to support insurgent forces, and watch as they subject every village that they enter to rape and summary executions. If that is what Rhodesia chose to turn to for survival, had they not abandoned the principles that made them different?
There is profanity throughout.
August 8, 2020
🥺.
Courage, bravery, honor, virtue. Unfortunately these are not enough to defeat evil ideologies who devoutly pronounce themselves as righteous. The paternalist approach by Western Liberals to destroy the country of Rhodesia is disgusting, and is ever more troubling now with the racial supremacy and ignorance an issue around the world. Deceived and cheated out of victory by the politicians who sought their economic gains over any sort of ethical responsibility, it’s a shame people like this dominate the political power positions of the world.
But enough of that, Darrell Watt is a DANGEROUS MAN, incredible tracker, warrior, bushman who led dozens of successful missions against formidable odds. Easily one of the greatest fighters the world has seen, he was a different breed. But he wasn’t just a soldier, he was a good man, who never lost touch with his humanity. The same can be said for most of the Rhodesian SAS, who fought so valiantly. Even if the country is no more, their deeds will not be forgotten, and they were in the true moral right as they fought not for “race supremacy” like the conceited liberals judged, but for their homeland, for honor, they never lost it.
Rest In Peace to all the brave men, and salutations to those willing to fight not a material reward, but willing to fight for metaphysical means, as long as this type of man lives, there is hope for this world.
Courage, bravery, honor, virtue. Unfortunately these are not enough to defeat evil ideologies who devoutly pronounce themselves as righteous. The paternalist approach by Western Liberals to destroy the country of Rhodesia is disgusting, and is ever more troubling now with the racial supremacy and ignorance an issue around the world. Deceived and cheated out of victory by the politicians who sought their economic gains over any sort of ethical responsibility, it’s a shame people like this dominate the political power positions of the world.
But enough of that, Darrell Watt is a DANGEROUS MAN, incredible tracker, warrior, bushman who led dozens of successful missions against formidable odds. Easily one of the greatest fighters the world has seen, he was a different breed. But he wasn’t just a soldier, he was a good man, who never lost touch with his humanity. The same can be said for most of the Rhodesian SAS, who fought so valiantly. Even if the country is no more, their deeds will not be forgotten, and they were in the true moral right as they fought not for “race supremacy” like the conceited liberals judged, but for their homeland, for honor, they never lost it.
Rest In Peace to all the brave men, and salutations to those willing to fight not a material reward, but willing to fight for metaphysical means, as long as this type of man lives, there is hope for this world.
February 14, 2024
This was an utterly superb book. When I received my European History degree from a less than stellar institution I wrote a 30 page paper and I took a controversial stance on why White Imperialism was a good thing. I quoted Rudyard Kipling's poem White Man's Burden. In this poem Kipling posits that it is necessary for the White man to bring culture, economic stability, and moral values to places like Africa because without them you have chaos, corruption. mayhem and murder. Name one black led country in Africa that is successful. Go ahead I will wait. Oh really nothing? Yeah Wakanda does not count, woke nonsense. No greater example exists than Rhodesia of the power of corrupt scumbags like Robert Mugabe, who was allowed to murder white settlers and take control of Rhodesia and re-name it that current shit hole country Zimbabwe. In this book the betrayal of a successful country economically, morally, and politically is clearly laid out by the author Wessels. He outlines the exploits of a few incredible men who fought a righteous cause against incredible odds and were never defeated in combat but by pieces of shit like Jimmy Carter, Andrew Young, and Margaret Thatcher. Within a generation a prosperous country was reduced to run away corruption. inflation and total ruination by Black rule. Exactly what has happened in every single country where they have taken over. An unpopular stance that is impossible to ignore based on post colonial rule facts. The Dark continent indeed.
October 5, 2023
Despite the author trying really hard to portray Rhodesia as a non-racist “good guy,” his own writing betrays his argument. Here are just a few tidbits:
- The book begins with a rehashing of the myth of the “White Man’s Burden.” Saying that before white people brought civilization and peace to the territory that was to be known as Rhodesia, the people living there were uncivilized and violent.
- Heavy handed use of racial slurs in this book. Won’t say the word here, but this alone destroys any argument that race was not a factor of antagonism.
- Hannes regularly mentions the various war crimes of the other side, but talks rather glibly when he himself admits to shooting a witch doctor who was running away. It’s okay though, he reassures us, because he felt kinda bad about it after.
- Again standing in the way of his argument is when he cites an anecdote in which the truck was lining up to kill his peers, when they took their shirts off to show the driver that they were white, and thus on the same team. Why did they need to do this? Because they were dressed in blackface. This further drives home the point that the conflict was along racial lines.
- Author admits that SAS units forbade black men from joining them.
These are just a few of many, many examples within the book that prove that it’s just the frustrated ramblings of a war criminal.
- The book begins with a rehashing of the myth of the “White Man’s Burden.” Saying that before white people brought civilization and peace to the territory that was to be known as Rhodesia, the people living there were uncivilized and violent.
- Heavy handed use of racial slurs in this book. Won’t say the word here, but this alone destroys any argument that race was not a factor of antagonism.
- Hannes regularly mentions the various war crimes of the other side, but talks rather glibly when he himself admits to shooting a witch doctor who was running away. It’s okay though, he reassures us, because he felt kinda bad about it after.
- Again standing in the way of his argument is when he cites an anecdote in which the truck was lining up to kill his peers, when they took their shirts off to show the driver that they were white, and thus on the same team. Why did they need to do this? Because they were dressed in blackface. This further drives home the point that the conflict was along racial lines.
- Author admits that SAS units forbade black men from joining them.
These are just a few of many, many examples within the book that prove that it’s just the frustrated ramblings of a war criminal.
August 24, 2022
I’ve read a lot about the SOG operators in Vietnam and their almost suicidal missions and have never thought anyone else could top their stories of heroism and skill. That is until I read this book. These Rhodesians were another breed. They did everything the SOG did and more, including running up to 30 kilometres a day, in full gear whilst simultaneously tracking and anti-tracking an enemy and eventually destroying them.
This book has a perfect blend of providing a historical overview with names and dates whilst mixing insane war-time stories such as hot extractions under heavy enemy fire and pursuit. It’s hands down in the top 5 best military books I’ve read and likely in my top 10 books of all time and of any genre.
I’ve always been amazed and curious at the pride and love Rhodesians still have for what their country once was. Upon reading this book, I further understand.
History tends to paint a black and white picture of what occurs. I believe part of the reason we were never taught about Rhodesia is because it doesn’t fit the narrative that the world powers at the time wanted, and it still doesn’t.
This book has a perfect blend of providing a historical overview with names and dates whilst mixing insane war-time stories such as hot extractions under heavy enemy fire and pursuit. It’s hands down in the top 5 best military books I’ve read and likely in my top 10 books of all time and of any genre.
I’ve always been amazed and curious at the pride and love Rhodesians still have for what their country once was. Upon reading this book, I further understand.
History tends to paint a black and white picture of what occurs. I believe part of the reason we were never taught about Rhodesia is because it doesn’t fit the narrative that the world powers at the time wanted, and it still doesn’t.
December 22, 2023
Told with clarity and integrity, the story is one that makes one’s blood boil, for the duplicitous manner in which the Rhodesians were treated.
Historically the British have never done well when meddling in the affairs of another nation. How utterly shameful for the British government of the time to use a fledgling nation as a political pawn to further their own political interests.
The evidence is clear that this did not work.
For the men working at the tip of the spear
for the sacrifices they made for the lives they lost and for all those involved in their momentous efforts to save their country they are to be held in the highest esteem.
What an amazing effort on their behalf over years of struggle and to be so close to fulfilling their mission and then at the 11th hour to have the proverbial rug pulled from beneath their feet, utter disappointment .
These men and women who stood against tyrants at home and abroad who were fighting to defend and protect their country are to be forever remembered and respected.
The likes of which we may never see again.
Historically the British have never done well when meddling in the affairs of another nation. How utterly shameful for the British government of the time to use a fledgling nation as a political pawn to further their own political interests.
The evidence is clear that this did not work.
For the men working at the tip of the spear
for the sacrifices they made for the lives they lost and for all those involved in their momentous efforts to save their country they are to be held in the highest esteem.
What an amazing effort on their behalf over years of struggle and to be so close to fulfilling their mission and then at the 11th hour to have the proverbial rug pulled from beneath their feet, utter disappointment .
These men and women who stood against tyrants at home and abroad who were fighting to defend and protect their country are to be forever remembered and respected.
The likes of which we may never see again.
May 28, 2018
I will completely side-step the issue of whether or not Rhodesian government was "racist" as seems to be in-vogue today and review this book solely as a military biography. The Rhodesian SAS was one of the most ingenious and lethal fighting forces the world has ever seen. The men you will meet in this book loved their country, feared what would happen if the communists took over, and ultimately, it turned out their fears were not unfounded.
The narrative is easy to read and you will feel like you are on patrol with these soldiers as they creep through the African bush, lay in wait, and then ambush their quarry with devastating accuracy, bravery and cunning. No study of asymmetrical warfare would be complete without studying the Rhodesian SAS. I see what has happened in that poor, sad country today, as well as what is happening in South Africa, and it's too bad they weren't given more time to transition gradually into a fully color-blind, democratic society.
The narrative is easy to read and you will feel like you are on patrol with these soldiers as they creep through the African bush, lay in wait, and then ambush their quarry with devastating accuracy, bravery and cunning. No study of asymmetrical warfare would be complete without studying the Rhodesian SAS. I see what has happened in that poor, sad country today, as well as what is happening in South Africa, and it's too bad they weren't given more time to transition gradually into a fully color-blind, democratic society.
August 13, 2024
A Handful of Hard Men recounts various stories among the Rhodesian SAS from beginning to end of the Rhodesian Bush War. There's some pretty incredible stories, but they don't vary much as one might imagine. They're stories that need to be told but if you're looking for more history and context this may not be the right book.
The author and contributor's bias is pretty strong, and was easy to pick up on rather early, so it's hard to say if anything else here has been exaggerated. The Rhodesian army and commandos did hold out against impossible odds for more than a decade, so maybe most of these stories aren't a stretch.
I would recommend maybe reading one or two chapters for general interest. It's not a book you need to read cover to cover, in fact it left me wanting more about the subject.
The author and contributor's bias is pretty strong, and was easy to pick up on rather early, so it's hard to say if anything else here has been exaggerated. The Rhodesian army and commandos did hold out against impossible odds for more than a decade, so maybe most of these stories aren't a stretch.
I would recommend maybe reading one or two chapters for general interest. It's not a book you need to read cover to cover, in fact it left me wanting more about the subject.
October 5, 2020
I enjoy reading books about the US Special Forces which in turn got me interested in the Rhodesian SAS and Selous Scouts. I was not very familiar with the politics involved in the Rhodesian Bush War so it made this book a little more difficult to read but the operations themselves within the book were amazing and very enjoyable.
To all who are interested in reading this, this book is definitely Pro-Rhodesia because Hans Wessel was a fighting member of the Rhodesian Military so understand where he comes from when he wrote this. This isn't a "history of the Rhodesian War" book this is a book about Darrell Watt being the amazing man that he was and the gunfights he was in.
Overall was it worth the purchase, yes. I got what I intended out of the booked and learned a little on the way. The only reason I gave it 4 stars was because at times it was difficult to read and keep up with everything but nonetheless a great military read.
To all who are interested in reading this, this book is definitely Pro-Rhodesia because Hans Wessel was a fighting member of the Rhodesian Military so understand where he comes from when he wrote this. This isn't a "history of the Rhodesian War" book this is a book about Darrell Watt being the amazing man that he was and the gunfights he was in.
Overall was it worth the purchase, yes. I got what I intended out of the booked and learned a little on the way. The only reason I gave it 4 stars was because at times it was difficult to read and keep up with everything but nonetheless a great military read.
March 3, 2021
This was not what I was expecting. The book covers a Small special forces unit from Rhodesia in the 70s. The backdrop theme is the political agendas of several African countries, Britain, and the United States. Much of the conflict was happening during the Vietnam "conflict." I was amazed to hear about Marxism as a rule and was relieved to see how a small unit of men could make a difference when it came to trying to free people from such idiotic political irresponsibilities. It would seem that even America is to be headed towards Marxist idealism. One has only to crack any history book dealing with Marxist countries to know that it never works. Man is always corruptible.
February 22, 2019
Hannes Wessel's fascinating glimpse into the brutal Rhodesian bush war. The firsthand accounts of the men who were there provides insights into the tactics and techniques of one of the most successful counter insurgencies. It also tells the story of a geo-political drama involving colonialism, Marxism and racism. Awareness of the tragedies that unfolded over the next 40 years adds another interesting dimension to this story. Great read if you are interested in combat action, counter insurgencies and geo-politics.
March 25, 2020
I found this to be a challenging read and very slow at times, but its important to keep in mind its a chronicle, with the focus being on the facts, not entertaining the reader with a literary masterpiece. That being said, I found this account to be very compelling. The tales of unconventional warfare, the Rhodesian SAS & Darrell Watt where captivating to say the least. I knew very little about this chapter in history and left me feeling ashamed of the British governments actions during this period. This book has certainly inspired me to find more books on the war in Rhodesia.
April 18, 2022
I came to Wessels having read much military history but none from Rhodesia. While I am glad I picked this up, I can't rate it higher because it ultimately was so repetitive. There's no denying the bravery and skill of these SAS troopers. Still, the tactical-level history was doomed to feel too familiar and thus tedious (much as the Rhodesian cause was doomed).
There are some interesting anecdotes (hyenas!!!). There is also a singular view of the politics that will either compel or repel you.
HH
There are some interesting anecdotes (hyenas!!!). There is also a singular view of the politics that will either compel or repel you.
HH
Displaying 1 - 30 of 72 reviews