Clausewitz And Jomini's View Of War Essay

The concept of war as a static and unchanging occurrence is an outdated and dangerous miscalculation.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

“Tomorrow When The War Began” by John Marsden, is a novel of survival, friendship, love and war. He uses many language techniques (e.g. simile, metaphor, personification, oxymoron, irony, symbol, allusion etc.) to get across to the reader the importance of each of the themes discussed. He also uses these techniques to set the mood in each chapter and to help emphasise each major point in the novel. “We’ve learnt a lot and had to figure out what’s important- what matters, what really matters.”- Ellie

In the year of 1792, a twelve year old boy named Carl von Clausewitz enlisted in the Prussian army for war, and soon after appearing in such battles as Jena-Auerstädt and Waterloo, became dedicated in conflict and its reasons for their results most of his life. By being alive at the same time as Napoleon's rise and fall, Carl von Clausewitz was able to document and relate how war was fought, won, and lost. It's important to comprehend that in his writings, he is relaying why it is pertinent to think about how war is fought, not how to win a war. Clausewitz' theories described in “On War,” are not only effective in wars fought in today's time and past, but will remain current in future endeavors, due to its generic layout of

In the study of military history, historians at times use what is known as the “fog of war” technique with expectations of keeping away from the historians’ fallacy. In this approach, the actions and choices of the historical subject are assessed primarily on the premise of what that individual knew at that time and not on future developments that the individual could not have known. Fischer’s approach is a scientific-like “what and how” only approach and rarely fields the question of “why.” Fischer states that the “why” deals with the metaphysical issues that bring no definitive results. Fischer’s work shows that historiography can only be taken seriously if it is practiced according to strictly empirical procedures and can only be done by asking the correct questions and answering them according to the strict methodology of “historical logic.” The historian’s task is to solve problems, to ask appropriate questions and to seek answers by researching the information based on archival and other methods of research. Interpretation is inevitable, but the interpretation should conform to the

MP1 One of the Carl Von Clausewitz’s central issues that describes war’s dynamic is the concept of “culminating point of victory.” Clausewitz advocated the idea that an offensive should be focused on the defender’s collapse, otherwise there is a “culminating point”, a momentum where the attacker loses his advantage for strategic victory. As he mentioned, “every attack which does not lead to peace must necessarily end up as a defense.” Military history has been enriched by battles of commanders with an overestimating self-confidence and high spirit who failed to identify this momentum. As a result, they lost the tactical advantage and they were defeated. Classical example in the World War II

During the conquest of the new world, the idea of varied culture was far from the minds of the Spanish exploring the Americas . This lack of thought for other definitions of normal allows modern readers to better understand the debate of the time: the moral obligations associated with subjugation and conversion. Two Spanish theologians, Bartolomé de las Casas and Juan Gines de Sepulveda, thought that their specific means for carrying out the tasks of evangelization and colonization were superior to the other. Though no clear winner of the dispute over a “just war” was declared, their argumentation continues to be discussed due to its relevancy.

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.

War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, written by the talented author Chris Hedges, gives us provoking thoughts that are somewhat painful to read but at the same time are quite personal confessions. Chris Hedges, a talented journalist to say the least, brings nearly 15 years of being a foreign correspondent to this book and subjectively concludes how all of his world experiences tie together. Throughout his book, he unifies themes present in all wars he experienced first hand. The most important themes I was able to draw from this book were, war skews reality, dominates culture, seduces society with its heroic attributes, distorts memory, and supports a cause, and allures us by a

To developed the war theory, Clausewitz used the Dialectic approach, which is a method of philosophical argument that involves contradictory process between opposing ideas to establish the truth, propounded by the German philosopher G W F Hegel. His “thesis” on war is an ‘absolute war." According to him total or absolute war carry out with the ‘utmost violence ' for unlimited aims, and there is no ‘logic limit’ to the application of available all power. On total war both warring fraction could not suspend their ‘military operation’ and ‘hostilities’ until one or other side finally defeated, or ‘fully discharge’ His "antithesis" is historical evidence and his own experience of war. By interaction between these thesis and antithesis, Clausewitz develops Synthesis (theory of war).

The influence of various theories and concepts on the conduct World War I has generated a range of studies in an attempt to understand how and why World War I was fought. Specifically, Clausewitz’s theories on warfare have come under a considerable amount of scrutiny with regards to their influence on World War I. This scrutiny has led to the ascertation that the protracted and bloody stalemate of World War I was largely due to a stubborn reliance on Clausewitz’s theories. The question that this paper attempts to address is weather the cause of the bloody and protracted

On War is not just a manuscript on of how to understand war; it also provides insight into what Clausewitz thought about the dynamics of human thinking. Similar to what Claxton outlined in Hare Brain, Tortoise Mind, Clausewitz believed that, “knowledge must be absorbed into the mind that it almost ceases to exist in a separate, objective way.” (Clausewitz, p147). In other words, Clausewitz believed knowledge

It can be hard to fully comprehend the effects the Vietnam War had on not just the veterans, but the nation as a whole. The violent battles and acts of war became all too common during the long years of the conflict. The war warped the soldiers and civilians characters and desensitized their mentalities to the cruelty seen on the battlefield. Bao Ninh and Tim O’Brien, both veterans of the war, narrate their experiences of the war and use the loss of love as a metaphor for the detrimental effects of the years of fighting.

The Just War Theory is a doctrine founded by Saint Augustine which has helped bring much discussion and debate to wars and the morality to fight in them. Wars and fights between people have gone on forever and are not perceived to stop anytime soon so it is important that some people thought about when and why they should ever fight. For many years Christians never part toke in this fighting due to teachings of the Bible and Jesus' teaching on 'turning the other cheek' and 'live by the sword, die by the sword'. Saint Augustine would be one of the first to talk about how a Christian could be a soldier and serve God at the same time. Through this thought we would receive the Just War Theory which gave a set of requirements for someone to partake

“We will glorify war—the world’s only hygiene—militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, beautiful ideas worth dying for, and scorn for woman” . They believed in war as a cleansing agent and focused on motion in time and space, simultaneity of views and political movement – because many of them believed in Fascism.

The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were turbulent eras generating several changes in the way how commanders led the war. The world owes a debt to one man for interpreting and recording his contributions to strategy and the art of war: Antoine Henri Jomini. The purpose of this paper to explain why the Jomini’s theories are a school of thoughts that remain adequate for explaining warfare in the modern era. The importance of logistics, the acceptance of principles of war, and the concept of the geometry of battlespace proposed by Jomini’s theories are three broad concepts that are still adequate for explaining in the modern era.