33 Strategies Of War

Over the course of history, the strategic environment has changed rapidly and is now more complex than ever before – it is currently characterized by unpredictability and disorder, and may yet manifest itself in the collapse of nuclear armed nations, destabilizing conflict in geo-politically vital regions, and humanitarian crises. A world of disparate actors – not all nation states – now exists. Unpredictable events will continue to cause strategic surprise. The widespread effects of past conflicts such as World War II, Vietnam and the Iraq war are still being felt and have created significant strategic repercussions. The failures of these conflicts are the result of our military and political leaders’ failure to quickly adapt to wartime conditions. This occurs because of a general refusal to commit to a military culture of learning that encourages serious debate, critical assessments of our military operations, and challenges to our doctrine in the face of emerging change. Additionally, leaders have struggled with the critical responsibility of forecasting and providing for a ready force, one that is well-resourced and prepared to conduct future operations. It is the responsibility of our military and political leaders to send our military to war with a ready force, and a strategy that will ultimately result in victory. But understanding war and warriors is critical if societies and governments are to make sound judgments concerning military policy.

The concept of war as a static and unchanging occurrence is an outdated and dangerous miscalculation. More accurately, war is a fluidic, evolving and shifting phenomenon constantly reinventing itself, rendering stagnant, inflexible principles potentially disastrous. Consequently, as students of war and future players in this transforming theatre, the study of eras of significant development is an extremely relevant pursuit. Recognizing the need for adaptation and the creation of doctrine is now a prerequisite for any effective modern commander. War is unpredictable in nature and particularly so in current theatres of operation, in which change is rapid

Clausewitz’s attack of enemy centers of gravity and Sun Tzu’s prioritization of attack of important elements of national power provide contrasting approaches to the development of effective strategy. These contrasts are reflections of each author’s perspective on how war should be waged, the proper use of force, their definitions of the ideal victory and how best to achieve that victory as well as their methodologies,

Nicolo Machiavelli’s The Prince and Sun Tzu’s The Art of War both both provide directions for leadership with similar goals. The Prince is primarily geared towards providing valuable information about how a ruler of many principalities may govern different populations and acquire new lands. The Art of War provides us with a schematic of the optimal path to victory. This book is instead directed towards generals of powerful militaries with only the goal of winning. Concepts such as Machiavelli’s view of destruction will be contrasted with Sun Tzu’s victory-oriented argument for taking whole and several of their other ideas will be compared. Although Machiavelli and Sun Tzu have different intended audiences, many of their ancient tactics can

Battles and fights are some examples of conflict in most fictional stories. They can be many different fights, like the epic battle between good and evil, or a kingdom defending their land from enemies. When people think of the word ‘battle’, they may think of climatic sword fights and war. But sometimes, battles can take place inside of a person. Perhaps a character may have conflicting aspirations and desires that may cause an internal battle and maybe result in something catastrophic. Or perhaps a character has opposing personalities that might clash and cause something important to happen. In many works of literature, the writer

American colonists were justified in waging war and breaking away from Britain. After French-Indian war, lots of thing happen between America and Britain. British wanted American pay for their death, but American think they have no duty to pay for it, they wanted freedom, than American revolution break out. The reason why American were justified breaking away from Britain is the unreasonable taxes that British passed after French-Indian war.

Bloch studied about war for approximately fourteen years before materializing his researches into the form of a book. Eventually, his study came out in 1899 but Bloch would never get the opportunity to observe his ideas being validated by the two world wars. An entrepreneur and a civilian writer, Jean de Bloch's theory of war has proven viable throughout the years precisely because it witnessed its actualization within the two world wars. His analysis on military strategies is all time relevant because it explores war from standout points that indeed remain constant no matter the circumstances or the time of its emergence.

War is a human endeavor. Humanity continually pursues solutions to counter evolving threats with the end of preserving power while also enabling peace. Civilizations resort to war to maintain their perception of this equilibrium. Defined threats and adversaries have changed throughout history, however, the essence of human nature and the base concept of conflict itself have not. Carl von Clausewitz’s theories on warfare capture the relationship between humanity and its application of war, remaining relevant in today’s era through their pensive explanations of timeless philosophical principles regarding the concept of war. These theories regarding war in politics, the key factors affecting war, and the extent that war is applied are inherently interconnected, providing insight on the relationships between humanity and its application of war.

Technology, Discipline, Unique System of War Finance, Highly Aggressive Military Tradition, and Emphasis on Innovation are the five principles of the Western Way of War. Having a unique system of war finance, emphasis on innovation, and discipline are the aspects of the western way of war that describe warfare in the age of Napoleon (1789-1815).

There are no universal theories to explain the true nature and character of war, and any war theories are not a fact or absolute truth. All strategic principles are dynamic and contextual, so “every age had its own kind of war, its own limiting conditions, and its own peculiar preconceptions.” The battlefield environment of the 21st century will be the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, and nature of war will be completely different because of the Revolution in Military Affairs. Highly advance communication and information technologies, a dramatic increase in computing capabilities, developed of precision munitions, dominant air and space power ‘war could be waged by the projection of

Martin van Creveld wrote The Transformation of War book in 1991 when he detailed a predictive hypothesis about the changing character of war into what he called ?Nontrinitarian War. There were conflicts arise as intrastate wars and were not based on the simplified version of Clausewitz?s ?remarkable trinity? of government, people and military forces (Van Creveld, 1991, pg. 49). In his book, Van Creveld offers an account of warfare in the previous millennium and suggests what the future might hold. The drive was that major war was draining and the emergence of forms of war ?that are simultaneously old and new? now threatened to create havoc.

Handel compares The Art of War by Sun Tzu, and On War by Clausewitz. Both literary works derive from before the industrial age. Handel expresses, “…the role of intelligence-the insights of Sun Tzu and Clausewitz identify to immutable “human” dimensions of warfare so essential for victory” (The Art of War and On War Compared, 5). The emphasis Handel places on human dimensions extends to the reader the notion that the human act of spying, or gathering intelligence, is essential to victory. Handel notes that “…appreciation for and the continuous use of intelligence are essential, for good intelligence work can provide more accurate insights into the enemy’s mind, intentions, and capabilities…dispositions and plans” (46). The accumulation of all these ultimately leads to victory, according to Sun Tzu. Essentially, knowing the enemy’s intention, a military leader can come up with the best overall strategy, or best course of action, to take advantage of an opponent’s flaw or

The first chapter of the book concentrates on ideas and information that a general must be aware of. The art of war is governed by five constant factors, all of which need to be taken into account. They are: the Moral Law; Heaven; Earth; the Commander; Method and discipline. These factors should be known to every general because this will serve as guidelines in conduct of a war. Knowledge on one’s environment and assessment of it is important to achieve victory. Sun Tzu believes that deception and intelligence will bring home the bacon.

Intrigue, assassination, spies, and prostitutes make for captivating reading in Kautilya’s Arthishastra. One could easily dismiss this extensive composition as amusing literature from ancient times, seemingly relevant today only in fiction or action-adventure movies. Kautilya, an ancient Indian military theorist and advisor to Chandragupta Maurya, is known as an extreme realist who by comparison makes Machiavelli appear tame due to the brutality of his methods. Kautilya’s Arthashastra is a comprehensive compendium containing fifteen books providing kings and ministers procedures for conquering, maintaining control of, and running states in the dangerous and uncertain environment of ancient India. Of the fifteen books, three relate to war and national security and contain several concepts relevant to modern times. Like Kautilia over two thousand years ago, the United States (U.S.) military today faces a dangerous and uncertain global environment and therefore must prepare for a wide array of contingencies. A brief review of three books contained in the Arthashastra that relate to war and national security provide insight to key issues that challenged Kautilya in his time and also challenge the U.S. military today; these issues are not addressed by other military theorists and for this reason I believe that Kautilya’s Arthashastra best explains the nature and character of war in the 21st century.

While “The Art of War” was written by Sun Tzu during the 6th century B.C., long before the colonization of the Americas, the onslaught of the Crusades, and before the Persian Wars of around 490 B.C., it remains relevant to this day. There is also strong evidence that the work inspired Napoleon and was used in the planning of Operation Desert Storm. “The Art of War” has withstood the sands of time due to its simplistic approach, and its applicability to non-military strategies. “The Art of War“, interpreted by Gerald, A. Michaelson, as well as other authors, use Sun Tzu’s timeless strategies and apply them to the modern day corporate world.