|
This is a great book if your a military buff. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know the science of war. It was well written and very interesting. Buy this book.
In addition, already there did not exist a genius advanced to his epoch as Napoleon.Be careful ordering an abridge edition of this work. In an age of masses armies, inaugurated by Napoleon, soon was clear that it was not possible to win a war between full armed nations, in an alone great battle.
The books or parts that compose it were finished in variable degree by the author, whose premature death did not allow its conclusion. It is an extensive work, since it fits with the epoch, in which writing little was a sign of inconsistency, little importance and scanty reflection.
He praises Liddell Hart's opposite: a decisive battle using the maximum own concentration and power on the enemy army. I am interested in the first chapters on the theory and the philosophy of the war.
Other books treat on the tactics of a period in which the enemy deployment was staying at the sights of the enemy command and his HHQQ and auxiliary, placed in a nearby height. It was necessary a campaign with successive victorious operations, looking for the achievement of the military goals of the campaign (theatre of operations, Europe, Pacific Ocean, Africa) or the strategy.
Becuase some of the books could be missing.
Clausewitz was a Prussian staff officer who saw his first combat at the age of twelve, fighting against Napoleon - a task which was to occupy much of his life. But it is as metaphor that I think Clausewitz's book is most useful. Every action taken should be a step in that direction.-Only a nut-job starts a war without having a concrete idea of how to finish it; don't bite off more than you can chew, and always have a "Plan B." -In war, everything is very simple, but there is a huge difference between "simple" and "easy." -Iron will power can overcome any obstacle, but it often wears out the vehicle in which it travels - be it a man or an army. -Politics and warfare are therefore two sides of the same coin; if the underlying political purpose of a war is flawed, the war will be unsuccessful.-However, once war is engaged, political consideration are subordinate to military aims. Then stomp the head.-In war, the mistakes that come from kindness are the very worst.
You can win lots of battles and still lose the war.-Everything you do once war is engaged must serve a single, clearly understood objective. ON WAR was an attempt to codify the basic principles of warfare as he saw them, using the campaigns of Frederick the Great as well as the lessons of the Napoleonic Wars as his inspiration. Don't let politicians try to dictate how you fight.-Strategy is the overall plan you are following in a war; tactics are how you fight the battles. 2) Understanding that all human interaction is political, i.e., you can't ignore politics so you must learn how to use them to serve your ends. In this long-winded but brilliant work, Clausewitz (perhaps without meaning it) lays down the fundamental principles by which success is achieved in any field in life.
Rewritten to apply to business, sports, relationships, and life generally, Clausewitz's maxims would make a great self-help book. The most compassionate war is the one that ends quickly, and the best way of ending it quickly is by employing such overwhelming violence that the enemy is horrified into surrender. Cut the head off, not the fingers and the toes. If your strategy is flawed, no amount of tactical brilliance will save you.
You can win a battle by sheer force of will, but you may very well destroy your army doing it.and no battle is worth that.-The proper way to win battles is to identify the weak point in the enemy's line and concentrate all your forces there. 4) That you should the most of your energy by concentrating it. Carl von Clausewitz's ON WAR is one of the most important books ever written, but it would be a great mistake to dismiss it merely as simply a treatise military philosophy. Had military leaders from Wilhelm II to Adolf Hitler to Lyndon Banes Johnson to George W. Bush consistently applied these principles to their military policy, they would have avoided a lot of grief. Consider the value of 1) Always understanding what you are getting into before you start it and why you are getting into it, as well as what you want out of it. Concentrate and win.-The way to win wars is to destroy the enemy's army, full stop. 5) Making sure all your individual movements lead you toward your goal, not away from it or sideways.
Some of his basic assertions were:-War is just politics pursed by violent means. Follow these principles and almost guarantee you'll soon forget how to fail. That's it, period final. That is, to destroy his means of resisting you, not to waste time capturing territory, cities, supply dumps, etc. 3) That your motives can be as important as your objectives. So, while it won't hurt to skim some of the more outdated or tedious passages if you're not interested in the mechanics of 19th century warfare, ON WAR remains a first-class primer, not merely on the art of war, but on the art of living.
I have the On War published by IAP, in November 2008 and it costs just US$9.99. I like it. I don't know why it is not listed when we search it.
On War is a great book and had Civil War Generals followed its advice, the war would have probably been over much sooner and not have lasted so long.If you like military history, this is a must read.
|
