A snipett of Clausewitz

[legin]

slightly old style english but a good bit:

"An army which preserves its usual formations under the heaviest fire, which is never shaken by imaginary fears, and in the face of real danger disputes the ground inch by inch, which, proud in the feeling of its victories, never loses its sense of obedience, its respect for and confidence in its leaders, even under the depressing effects of defeat; an army with all its physical powers, inured to privations and fatigue by exercise, like the muscles of an athlete; an army which looks upon all its toils as the means to victory, not as a curse which hovers over its standards, and which is always reminded of its duties and virtues by the short catechism of one idea, namely the honour of its arms;—Such an army is imbued with the true military spirit."

(from Book 3, Chapter V, Military Virtue of an Army)

http://www.clausewitz.com/CWZHOME/On_War/ONWARTOC.html

[Selwynn]

1. Blech...

I'm no impressed with Von's hero-ization of the horror of warfare.

It's not honorable, its not valiant, its not glorious, it not beautiful, it's not noble and it's certainly not righteous. It may at some points in history be necessary, but it remains the best and most tragic example of the evil humanity is capable of, when it puts its collective mind to it.

So I offer you another quote instead:

"All Wars are Crimes."

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Nah, try to think poluitical here

and think of the RW in this country.. they have done exactly that

and it is bloody time we do this too

[legin]

3. sort of the point I was making

was that we are involved in a sort of war with the right wing, so go to the guys who have experience of fighting wars.

Apart from the leaders bit it was sort of an attempt to cheer people up after last nights little defeat. (however feeble)

:-)

[legin]

4. Not that I particularily recomend reading 'On War'

although it is a basic grounding textbook.

there is an awful lot of difficult to read english to get through to pick up some good ideas.

One military science book that is defiatly good is 'The Conduct of War 1789 to 1967' by JFC Fuller. The second half of the book has a sort of a political/militay slant that is very interesting and informative even if one or two of the recomendations are a little daffy. The one that springs to mind is that the Allies should have sat out WWII, let Hitler and Stalin fight it out on the European continent, and then attack the winner who would have been weakened and exhausted by a long war. My view is that the winner would also be controling the resources of the whole of Europe.

That said the Fuller book is one of my 'bibles'.