NationStates Jolt Archive

Anyone ever read the entire book by Karl von Klausewitz? I am trying and am about 3/4 of the way through.

thoughts on its possibility? on the book?

or am i crazy for even reading it of my own volition?

(poll)

Never heard of it.

It was a bit wordy but pretty good.

Never heard of it.

Judging by the amount of replies this thread has, I don't think there is many people who have.

It was a bit wordy but pretty good.
My mistake, someone has read it.

d00d y0ur (r4zy f0r 3v3n 7ry1n6! |337 y0!
I actually think in L33t.

Judging by the amount of replies this thread has, I don't think there is many people who have.
Hmm.. Good call.

I agree with Poinginoh. It was dry at times, but on the whole I enjoyed it. I read excerpts for a polisci class a few years ago, and picked it up to read the whole thing last year.

I have a preference for the Art of war, myself. On war is incredibly dry, I've yet to get through it, despite repeated efforts.

I'll agree Art of War was better but On War wasn't bad just slow in spots.

Art of War has less relevance in the age of 1000 rounds per minute.

Art of War has less relevance in the age of 1000 rounds per minute.

I disagree - have you read it? (not saying you haven't, just enquiring.)

I disagree - have you read it? (not saying you haven't, just enquiring.)

Dipped into it once or twice.

honestly though, what use is it today knowing the correct time to deploy cavalry?

Actually Sun Tzu the art of War is a must read for most good business people or anyone who would " compete " . It could just as easily be called " The art of life " .
Clauzwitz on war is a much harder read..tedious even ..because he gets so into the nuts and bolts of logistics and organization . But he's right on track with his war is just the continuation of politics by a different method thinking and the fact that war must a total national commitment to be successfull ...he was way ahead of his time and his writing is still very relevant . Try reading Mahans book "The Influence of Sea Power Upon History" it will help you understand thee US and Great Britain . and is to stategic naval thinking ..or projection of power..what Clauwitz is to a Prussian General trying to organize Europe . ( for the Germans of course .:) )
But again ..a hard read .

Dipped into it once or twice.

honestly though, what use is it today knowing the correct time to deploy cavalry?


Tanks / mechanised infantry / Air calvary units...Your joking right ?:)

of course your not going to be running into many " squares ' of infantry ..but the proper use of calvary is still being taught...just not with horses ..;)

Dipped into it once or twice.

honestly though, what use is it today knowing the correct time to deploy cavalry?

I don't recall that being something talked about. Generally it's a lot less specific than that. it more talks about the basic theory of war (A war should be ended as quickly as possible. Though we have heard of foolish haste, there has never been a successful protracted war.) that kind of thing. It talks about how you should learn to understand your enemy. to look at what you have and what they have and decide whether you should fight or not. it's a much more flexible thing than anything that happens on the battlefield because it intrinsically recognises the battlefield will never be the same twice. it encourages commanders to think about their situation, and act on it within a rough framework, than giving a guide to any actual battle. It also discusses how commanders should lead their armies. I'd say that it's pretty applicable even today because it's so noncommital about what it is.

It was not much otherwise with the marches, for the artillery then separated itself completely from the rest of the army, in order to take advantage of better and more secure roads, and the cavalry on the wings generally took the right alternately, that each might have in turn its share of the honour of marching on the right.




jordaxia you will love this site..

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

Search results for " proper use of calvary"

Brief biography of Clausewitz
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 9
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 27
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 16
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 14
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 10
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 9
On War: Contents
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 12
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 13
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 16
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 12
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 12
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 15
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 24
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 8
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 20
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 15
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 11
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 28
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 11
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 7
Clausewitz.com military consulting
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 9
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 7
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 18
The Translator, COL J.J. Graham
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 19
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 10
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 8
search
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 15
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 12
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 21
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 15
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 18
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 19
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 11
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 9
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 8
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 21
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book II-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 13
Introduction to the Clausewitz Homepage on-line edition of ON WAR
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 14
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 14
Introduction to Clausewitz's ON WAR
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 8
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 25
Notice
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 22
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 10
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 11
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 7
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 14
Preface to Clausewitz's ON WAR.
David Reed, background
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 7
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 17
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 13
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book II-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 17
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 10
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book II-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 10
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 14
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 20
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 12
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 16
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 26
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 8
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 6
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 7
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 17
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 9
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 18
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 8
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 16
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 8
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 29
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book II-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 18
search
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book II-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 23
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 5
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 7
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 17
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 3
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 11
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 13
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 9
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VII-Chapter 7
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VIII-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book IV-Chapter 2
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book II-Chapter 1
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book V-Chapter 13
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book III-Chapter 5
1908 intro to Clausewitz's ON WAR
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book I-Chapter 4
Clausewitz, ON WAR - Book VI-Chapter 30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Search Information:

Terms: , proper, use, of, calvary
Boolean Used: OR
Case Insensitive




And yes you are still right ...he does put out theory and illustrations that take into account that the very essense of war is that its always changing.
and other good stuff thats still being taught today like...

THE overthrow of the enemy is the aim in war; destruction of the hostile military forces, the means both in attack and defence. By the destruction of the enemy's military force, the defensive is led on to the offensive, the offensive is led by it to the conquest of territory. Territory is, therefore, the object of the attack; but that need not be a whole country, it may be confined to a part, a province, a strip of country, a fortress. All these things may have a substantial value from their political importance, in treating for peace, whether they are retained or exchanged.

The object of the strategic attack is, therefore, conceivable in an infinite number of gradations, from the conquest of the whole country down to that of some insignificant place. As soon as this object is attained, and the attack ceases, the defensive commences. We may, therefore, represent to ourselves the strategic attack as a distinctly limited unit. But it is not so if we consider the matter practically, that is in accordance with actual phenomena. Practically the moments of the attack, that is, its views and measures, often glide just as imperceptibly into the defence as the plans of the defence into the offensive. It is seldom, or at all events not always, that a general lays down positively for himself what he will conquer, he leaves that dependent on the course of events. His attack often leads him further than he had intended; after rest more or less, he often gets renewed strength, without our being obliged to make out of this two quite different acts; at another time he is brought to a standstill sooner than he expected, without, however, giving up his intentions, and changing to a real defensive. We see, therefore, that if the successful defence may change imperceptibly into the offensive; so on the other hand an attack may, in like manner, change into a defence. These gradations must be kept in view, in order to avoid making a wrong application of what we have to say of the attack in general

But he does tend to go on a bit ...:) about EVERYTHING...I think they got paid by the friggin word back then ...

Both are crap, then. Neither have much information on the correct usage of cruise missiles!

Both are crap, then. Neither have much information on the correct usage of cruise missiles!

read this chapter among others and you will find a use for cruise missiles .:D



Chapter XVI
Lines of Communication
THE roads which lead from the position of an army to those points in its rear where its depôts of supply and means of recruiting and refitting its forces are principally united, and which it also in all ordinary cases chooses for its retreat, have a double signification; in the first place, they are its lines of communication for the constant nourishment of the combatant force, and next they are roads of retreat........etc.

Goddamn you! I hate you, you're no fun and you smell like an elephant!

But I just got washed last week ! dammit ...:D


I bet the dudes in Iraq on both sides read this part...

The consequence is, that enterprises of this description on a flank, which have always been more in fashion in books than in real warfare, now appear less of a practical nature than ever, and we may safely say that there is no danger in this respect to any lines of communication but such as are very long, and otherwise unfavourably circumstanced, more especially by being exposed everywhere and at any moment to attacks from an insurgent population.

:D


Great site..http://www.clausewitz.com/CWZHOME/CWZBASE.htm

But I just got washed last week ! dammit ...:D


I bet the dudes in Iraq on both sides read this part...



:D


Great site..http://www.clausewitz.com/CWZHOME/CWZBASE.htm

Washing is over rated, I haven't washed in a month. I am saving the Earth baby!

Art of War has less relevance in the age of 1000 rounds per minute.

Dipped into it once or twice.

honestly though, what use is it today knowing the correct time to deploy cavalry?

Both are crap, then. Neither have much information on the correct usage of cruise missiles!

If it's so out of date, then why is it still on the reading list for every single military academy and military professional's required reading list? (Let me give you a couple of hints - it's not for fun and it's not for the literary or historical value.)

(And I'm with Jordaxia - could you please cite the passage you refer to re the timing of cavalry deployments?)

Anyone ever read the entire book by Karl von Klausewitz? I am trying and am about 3/4 of the way through.

thoughts on its possibility? on the book?

or am i crazy for even reading it of my own volition?

(poll)


My two pence: I read it in stops and starts and bits and pieces. It's a bit dry and slow in places, but overall worthwhile.

If it's so out of date, then why is it still on the reading list for every single military academy and military professional's required reading list? (Let me give you a couple of hints - it's not for fun and it's not for the literary or historical value.)

(And I'm with Jordaxia - could you please cite the passage you refer to re the timing of cavalry deployments?)


Personaly I dont think its that type of book(s)..he will use examples though of the proper use of Calvary when he want to make a point..just look through the list ..but the whole idea is to teach the reader the conditions to be exploited and make them determine the proper timing by being educated enough to exploit opportunity when they see one and by what ever means at hand. he's training future Generals or field Marshalls.

but here he is discussing tactical measures..small unit tactics as it may be ..

Chapter VI
General Disposition of an Army

http://www.clausewitz.com/CWZHOME/On_War/Bk5ch06.html

Thats as close as your going to get I would think .

I know of it.

I can't even understand the poll. Even so most people here already know me thoughts, views, beleifs, and opinions on war.

It's sometimes necessarry to send in the trained serial killers to wipeout opposing nations and raze that government to the ground.

Anyone ever read the entire book by Karl von Klausewitz? I am trying and am about 3/4 of the way through.

thoughts on its possibility? on the book?

or am i crazy for even reading it of my own volition?

(poll)
It is as well worded as any University Lecturer's work.

hmph. more than i expected.

still, i pay more attention to the general thoery on war and such. later i'll post some favorite quotes.

"There was never a General wanting in boldness"
~von Clausewitz

The Art of War is more generalized and is very short and nondesricptove ins ome parts.

meh. back to reading it. :)

I was meant to read the entire thing for my War Studies course (surprise, hmm?) but upon finding out that Clausewitz had intended to rewrite the whole thing and only managed Chapter 1, Book 1 before copping it I decided to limit my reading to this section.

Smartest move I ever made.

Anyone ever read the entire book by Karl von Klausewitz? I am trying and am about 3/4 of the way through.
I read it when I was going through Officer Candidate School. Interesting and mostly still accurate, but somewhat dull in places.

Anyone ever read the entire book by Karl von Klausewitz? I am trying and am about 3/4 of the way through.

thoughts on its possibility? on the book?

or am i crazy for even reading it of my own volition?

(poll)

Isn't he the one that says that war is another form of diplomacy?

Chou En Lai (1989-1976), a premier and foreign minister of the People's Republic of China: "All diplomacy is a continuation of war by other means."

Karl von Clausewitz (1780-1831): "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

Chou En Lai (1989-1976), a premier and foreign minister of the People's Republic of China: "All diplomacy is a continuation of war by other means."

Karl von Clausewitz (1780-1831): "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

I figured it had something to do with politics :D

Depends on the translation you are reading...I have seen it as " War is a contination of diplomacy using different methods " .:)

I always wondered if French generals subsribed to clausewitz...and if they did ..why then the all the attention to fixed defenses ?:)

I always wondered if French generals subsribed to clausewitz...and if they did ..why then the all the attention to fixed defenses ?:)

They did. One of the things Clausewitz notes is the apparent advantage that the defender holds over the attacker. HOWEVER, he never comes up with a decent explanation for why.The French always hoped that their defences would delay an enemy advance long enough for a counter attack to be launched, in keeping with Clausewitz' writings on the reasons for a defensive posture.

Chou En Lai (1989-1976), a premier and foreign minister of the People's Republic of China: "All diplomacy is a continuation of war by other means."

Karl von Clausewitz (1780-1831): "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

hehe. . . .silly commies!

von klausewitz said stuff on two types of courage, all of which i cant remember now.

Personaly I dont think its that type of book(s)..he will use examples though of the proper use of Calvary when he want to make a point..just look through the list ..but the whole idea is to teach the reader the conditions to be exploited and make them determine the proper timing by being educated enough to exploit opportunity when they see one and by what ever means at hand. he's training future Generals or field Marshalls.

Whoosh... ;) That was aimed at The Gate Builders apparent misunderstanding that both works were of historical value only and had nothing to teach modern military leaders. (Having read both I'm familiar with what each author is presenting. ;))

but here he is discussing tactical measures..small unit tactics as it may be ..


http://www.clausewitz.com/CWZHOME/On_War/Bk5ch06.html

Thats as close as your going to get I would think .

That was aimed at The Gate Builders claim regarding that Sun-Tzu talked the correct time to deploy cavalry, which I didn't recall having been specifically addressed in The Art of War.

However, I'll leave off with Sun-Tzu's comment on the matter of small unit tactics:

Generally, commanding of many is like commanding of a few.

It is a matter of dividing them into groups.

Doing battle with a large army is like doing battle with a small army.
I read it when I was going through Officer Candidate School. Interesting and mostly still accurate, but somewhat dull in places.

And leave it to one of our resident military men to back up my point. :D However...
Chou En Lai (1989-1976)

:p

I find Machiavelli's works on war to be more entertaining, personally.

I always wondered if French generals subsribed to clausewitz...and if they did ..why then the all the attention to fixed defenses ?:)
But they keep forgetting about open flanks.

Ah've read the first book anyway.
( Which in some regards may be more the wife of his wife than his. )

Anyone ever read the entire book by Karl von Klausewitz? I am trying and am about 3/4 of the way through.

thoughts on its possibility? on the book?

or am i crazy for even reading it of my own volition?

(poll)


I´ve read some parts of it, but mainly dismissed it as being out-dated.
Try Mao's Theory on Guerilla Warfare instead.

I´ve read some parts of it, but mainly dismissed it as being out-dated.
Try Mao's Theory on Guerilla Warfare instead.


Ah reckon that's wot the Iraqis tried 3 years ago....

:p

Ah reckon that's wot the Iraqis tried 3 years ago....

:p

Or rather, what they are doing right now.
To paraphrase Mao, the longer the (perceived or actually) unjust war, the bigger the support for insurgents among the populace.
Good luck there.

Or rather, what they are doing right now.
To paraphrase Mao, the longer the (perceived or actually) unjust war, the bigger the support for insurgents among the populace.
Good luck there.

The guerilla is a fish in an ocean of peasants.

How do you get rid of those pesky fish?

Boil the sea...




The only thing those troublemakers are achieving is stopping our lads from leaving a spot where neither the jihadis nor I think they should be at all.

The only thing those troublemakers are achieving is stopping our lads from leaving a spot where neither the jihadis nor I think they should be at all.

Sure. If you dismiss the exorbitant costs of this war, the growing war weariness, the dissent in the USian population about whether or not the war is justified, the fact that continuing fights in Iraq drains ressources, human ones as well as material, the possibility to attain battle-hardened troops for the jihad etc., then you're right.

Sure. If you dismiss the exorbitant costs of this war, the growing war weariness, the dissent in the USian population about whether or not the war is justified, the fact that continuing fights in Iraq drains ressources, human ones as well as material, the possibility to attain battle-hardened troops for the jihad etc., then you're right.


I assure you that I don't loose sleep over it at night.

Coincidentally: the jihad is quite easy to target.
Especially if you are not queasy about collateral damage.

Coincidentally: the jihad is quite easy to target.
Especially if you are not queasy about collateral damage.

You mean as in 'carpet-bomb everything'?

You mean as in 'carpet-bomb everything'?


More as in: if it don't pledge Allegiance, kill it.


Anyway, did you ever hear about Curtis-LeMay?

More as in: if it don't pledge Allegiance [to us], kill it.

If it don't pledge Allegiance[to Allah], kill it.


Anyway, did you ever hear about Curtis-LeMay?

What about him?

Nice previous quote.
You get the idea - if it ain'tt on your side, you don't want it alive at all.

What about him?

Well, he once asked the Senate for 6000 bombs, so he could turn the Sovs into cinders.

He got those, but then he came back to the Senate, asking 4000 more.

Know what happened?

Care to tell me?
*plays along*

My mistake, someone has read it.
Looks like you have bean on the computer a long time are you alright i advise you sleep and/or get some sunlight

Care to tell me?
*plays along*

Some Senator asked him: General, we got you the 6000 to turn 'em into cinders. And now you want MORE. What's the hubbub all about?

So leMay said: Senator, I want to see the cinders DANCE.

Morale of the story: don't give supreme commands to folks who want more advanced weapons than good old tanks. Lest they blow the whole PLANET up and all.

Morale of the story: don't give supreme commands to folks who want more advanced weapons than good old tanks. Lest they blow the whole PLANET up and all.

I'ld substitute "who want more advanced weapons than good old tanks" with "psychotic mass-murderers", but other than that, agreed.
Anyway, do we have a topic we can return to? :D

I'ld substitut "who want more advanced weapons than good old tanks" with "psychotic mass-murderers", but other than that, agreed.
Anyway, do we have a topic we can return to? :D

Yeah. Do we think On War rocks?

Well, I do, but it´s out-dated. Cabinet warfare is over, it seems.

Well, I do, but it´s out-dated. Cabinet warfare is over, it seems.


I like The Secret Art of War ( aka 36 strategies ) better.
A timeless classic.