Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Strategy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Strategy

    The site linked below is not only related to Sun Tzu, though it is an excellent source for analysis and commentary.

    There are links to online versions of Vegetius, Machiavalli and Mahan, amongst others.

    Sun Tzu Art of War Website for the Modern Leader and Strategist:

    http://www.sonshi.com/
    Andy "Weeble" Weaver

    Research, Reference and Historical Study

    Illud Latine dici non potest

  • #2
    Great find Weeble, thanks!
    “To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life.”

    Comment


    • #3
      An excellant find, indeed...

      Thanx, Weeble!

      On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

      ACG History Today

      BoRG

      Comment


      • #4
        Great site! Thanks!
        www.clausewitz.com is also a good one if you have never visited.

        Regards
        Fatih
        "A nation which makes the final sacrifice for life and freedom does not get beaten." - Mustafa Kemal ATATURK

        Comment


        • #5
          Indeed!

          A hardy welcome to ACG, fatih!

          Weebles your man if ya need to find somethin.

          On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

          ACG History Today

          BoRG

          Comment


          • #6
            Welcome to the forum,fatih(X2)
            Btw I recommend Lidell Hart's treatise on the subject.........er,entitled "Strategy".
            "In times of change learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists."

            Comment


            • #7
              Thank you so much admiral and liuzg150181!
              I am delighted to be here.
              And liuzg150181,Liddel Hart's book "Strategy" is a masterpiece.Read it a couple of years ago and still use it sometimes for reference.
              But don't you think he criticized Clausewitz too much in his book "Startegy"?

              Regards
              Fatih
              "A nation which makes the final sacrifice for life and freedom does not get beaten." - Mustafa Kemal ATATURK

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by fatih
                Thank you so much admiral and liuzg150181!
                I am delighted to be here.
                And liuzg150181,Liddel Hart's book "Strategy" is a masterpiece.Read it a couple of years ago and still use it sometimes for reference.
                But don't you think he criticized Clausewitz too much in his book "Startegy"?

                Regards
                Fatih
                Yeah.but i think it was his past experience in WW1 that made him so nostalgic towards Clausewitz's military treatise,also partly due to Clausewitz's philosophical wordings in his treatise that made it so misunderstood,so much so that European military at WW1 believed that the outcome of war could only be decisively dictated by clashing head-on in the battlefield,thus as a result the high casaulty rate in WW1. Liddell Hart was more inclined to acknowledge Sun Tzu's "Art of War" as the real masterpiece which kept its eternal refreshness, in fact he believed that's where the gem of "indirect apporach" could be found. Interestingly, Lidell Hart thought the only other book that can be on par with Sun Tzu's is von Clausewitz.

                Another thing i heard about von Clausewitz's "On War" is that there are two version of it,one published by his widow while another is the one edited by his borther,whose edition changed many of its original meaning. Ironically,the latter version sold much better than the former one after the Prusso-Franco War which led to a "Clausewitz" fervor(From what i read the one commented by the British military historican Micheal Howard is actually the former one).

                Another point to note is that "On War" is an incomplete work,an accusation which even von Clausewitz admitted himself,thus vindicated Liddell Hart criticism that should Clausewitz lived longer he would have understood the nature of war better,though von Clausewitz already knew that by the time of his death and was amadant to edit his work. The part of the reason is that "On War" was more of a compilation of his work over long period of time,thus as his insight grew with experience and time,he found out that some of the stuff that he wrote previously needed amendments.
                "In times of change learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by liuzg150181
                  Yeah.but i think it was his past experience in WW1 that made him so nostalgic towards Clausewitz's military treatise,also partly due to Clausewitz's philosophical wordings in his treatise that made it so misunderstood,so much so that European military at WW1 believed that the outcome of war could only be decisively dictated by clashing head-on in the battlefield,thus as a result the high casaulty rate in WW1. Liddell Hart was more inclined to acknowledge Sun Tzu's "Art of War" as the real masterpiece which kept its eternal refreshness, in fact he believed that's where the gem of "indirect apporach" could be found. Interestingly, Lidell Hart thought the only other book that can be on par with Sun Tzu's is von Clausewitz.

                  Another thing i heard about von Clausewitz's "On War" is that there are two version of it,one published by his widow while another is the one edited by his borther,whose edition changed many of its original meaning. Ironically,the latter version sold much better than the former one after the Prusso-Franco War which led to a "Clausewitz" fervor(From what i read the one commented by the British military historican Micheal Howard is actually the former one).

                  Another point to note is that "On War" is an incomplete work,an accusation which even von Clausewitz admitted himself,thus vindicated Liddell Hart criticism that should Clausewitz lived longer he would have understood the nature of war better,though von Clausewitz already knew that by the time of his death and was amadant to edit his work. The part of the reason is that "On War" was more of a compilation of his work over long period of time,thus as his insight grew with experience and time,he found out that some of the stuff that he wrote previously needed amendments.
                  I read On War. I didn't like it. It was kinda boring. As you have mentioned, it has too much philosophy in it.Sun Tzu's "Art of War" also contains philosophy in it but it has never been boring for me.
                  But Hart especially accuses Clausewitz for reducing the art of war into a bloodbath.He also accuses Clausewitz for underestimating the effect of indirect approach.
                  But of course the real masterpiece is Sun Tzu's Art of War. I think On War is an overrated book. But this is of course my opinion and i am not a military expert.

                  Regards
                  Fatih
                  Last edited by fatih; 22 Dec 05, 23:19.
                  "A nation which makes the final sacrifice for life and freedom does not get beaten." - Mustafa Kemal ATATURK

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by liuzg150181
                    Welcome to the forum,fatih(X2)
                    Btw I recommend Lidell Hart's treatise on the subject.........er,entitled "Strategy".
                    If memory serves me when I studied Guderian's biography, he used the treatise as a basis for developing his strategies vis a vis Panzer Blitzkrieg. The ST site is great and many lessons can still be applied to modern combat tactics.
                    It's not the critic who counts, the credit belongs to the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust, sweat & blood, who at worst fails while daring, so that his place shall never be with cold, timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Welcome aboard Alone GreyWolf!

                      Make yourself easily at home, good sir!

                      On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

                      ACG History Today

                      BoRG

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Alone GreyWolf
                        If memory serves me when I studied Guderian's biography, he used the treatise as a basis for developing his strategies vis a vis Panzer Blitzkrieg. The ST site is great and many lessons can still be applied to modern combat tactics.
                        Welcome to the forums Alone GreyWolf.

                        Whilst Guderian was influenced by Basil Liddell Hart, the book "The Strategy of Indirect Approach" (1941), later reprinted as "Strategy: the indirect approach", was not his major influence.

                        Liddell Hart had commented on Lindsay's idea of an "Experimental Mechanical Force", and Fuller had largely set it up, but as more of a 'Tank Only' unit. Guderian agreed with Lindsay's ideas (especially with regard to self-propelled artillery).

                        For further details read:

                        Achtung - Panzer!
                        Heinz Guderian (1931)
                        Andy "Weeble" Weaver

                        Research, Reference and Historical Study

                        Illud Latine dici non potest

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hart and Fuller advocated a small, professional armored/mechanized force within an army. The Russians wanted to move towards a massed, mechanized/motorized army. If you are interested in strategy books that shaped the direction the Red Army went under Tukhachevsky see:

                          Strategy by Aleksandr A. Svechin (English version printed by East View Publications 1991)

                          The Nature of the Operations of Modern Armies by V.K. Triandafillov (English version published by Frank Cass 1994)
                          Leadership is the ability to rise above conventional wisdom.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by R.N. Armstrong
                            Hart and Fuller advocated a small, professional armored/mechanized force within an army. The Russians wanted to move towards a massed, mechanized/motorized army. If you are interested in strategy books that shaped the direction the Red Army went under Tukhachevsky see:

                            Strategy by Aleksandr A. Svechin (English version printed by East View Publications 1991)

                            The Nature of the Operations of Modern Armies by V.K. Triandafillov (English version published by Frank Cass 1994)
                            A brief treatment regarding Tukhachevsky and his deep battle doctrine on ACG:
                            http://www.armchairgeneral.com/artic...?p=2007&page=1
                            "In times of change learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists."

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X