i mean, chapter 2 clearly states some of the things that we have gone through and failed at as a country while engaging war.

im reading this thing, and it reads like a directions manual...

anyone experienced this book?

4/23/2008 11:42:29 PM

That and The Prince should be required reading for anyone who wishes to accomplish anything in life.

4/23/2008 11:50:09 PM

i'll take a look at the prince later on

but this book, it has some common sense, yet...pretty remarkable discussions in it.

4/23/2008 11:51:19 PM

Its interesting when you view the cultures and institutions that view learning the lessons of the past as irrelevant

4/24/2008 12:20:10 AM

i think that was the first thing i was required to read upon entering the USMC


a lot of the problem hasn't been in the military's understanding of what to do, though.

[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 12:22 AM. Reason : it was actually ISSUED to me]

and to be fair, the military did a pretty killer job of tearing the place apart. the political problems are the tough ones that haven't all yet been tackled.



[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 12:26 AM. Reason : the War was actually pretty Artfully prosecuted.]

4/24/2008 12:21:34 AM

true, seems the administration should have read it.

Quote :

"In war, the general receives his commands from the sovereign."

theres just so many quotables its ridiculous

4/24/2008 12:22:39 AM

Art of War and On Killing, I believed, were required reading in some parts of the Military?

4/24/2008 1:19:19 AM

what makes this art of war book so good? who wrote it that makes it so great and why shouldnt i just disregard this persons opinion?

4/24/2008 1:28:26 AM

^Google is a helluva site.

4/24/2008 2:16:42 AM

^^It was written by Sun Zi in the 6th century B.C. If you want to know weather it's good or not, I would recomend reading it and then making a decision.

4/24/2008 2:20:50 AM

Sun Tzu

amirite?

[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 2:23 AM. Reason : .]

4/24/2008 2:22:27 AM

Yeah sorry about that, I get a little retarded this time of night.

4/24/2008 2:24:26 AM

Quote :

"Art of War and On Killing, I believed, were required reading in some parts of the Military? "

On Killing is on the suggested reading list in the Marine Corps. I have a copy signed by the author. It might be my favorite book that I've read...certainly would be in the running.

Art Of War was issued to me on about my 2nd day of OCS.

4/24/2008 3:05:48 AM

Quote :

"and to be fair, the military did a pretty killer job of tearing the place apart. the political problems are the tough ones that haven't all yet been tackled. "

yes. since we went in without a clear political objective, and expected the military to handle that transition, therein lies the failure thus far.

4/24/2008 4:38:37 AM

Quote :

"what makes this art of war book so good? who wrote it that makes it so great and why shouldnt i just disregard this persons opinion?"

The Art of War has served as the foundation for Eastern military thought for nearly two and a half millennia in the Far East. From the Three Kingdoms period at the end of the Han Dynasty in China to the Sengoku Period during the Japanese Feudal era all the way to the modern era, the book has been constantly studied and quoted by general after general.

At very least, the Art of War is interesting from a historical and anthropological standpoint because it is one of the first books on military strategy and thoroughly integrated into the cultural fabric of 1.5 billion people.

What makes it attractive is that it's not a long text, easily quotable, and sufficiently abstract to be useful into the modern era.

4/24/2008 9:42:30 AM

I don't think the "military" is the problem. If anything they are doing too "good" of a job.

The problem is the people playing armchair general and cowboy in Washington DC; more specifically the White House.

"daddy when i grow up i want to be president so i can play commander in cheif in my very own war!"

[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 10:13 AM. Reason : aa]

4/24/2008 10:12:31 AM

damn the chinks were already talking about war in 6th century bc????

4/24/2008 10:13:48 AM

picked up a translation of it at branes and noble a few years back for like $10. The reason why the military hasn't read it is because its unpatriotic to read it.

^uh...'war' started way back since Adam and Eve fought over who's fault it was for being evicted from the Garden of Eden.

then again you are DNL and you're dumb as dog shit.

[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 10:18 AM. Reason : .]

4/24/2008 10:17:04 AM

rofl...that was so easy

4/24/2008 10:20:09 AM

Quote :

"The reason why the military hasn't read it is because its unpatriotic to read it. "

what in the hell?

4/24/2008 11:58:38 AM

Why would a book on war and stategy be considered unpatriotic?

4/24/2008 12:05:34 PM

Yes.

You've clearly discovered what the best military minds in the country haven't.






















I'm being sarcastic and am pointing this out because you obviously ride to the internet cafe on the short bus.

4/24/2008 12:49:29 PM

i just checked out "On Killing"

because I give a shit

4/25/2008 9:47:14 AM

Quote :

"The reason why the military hasn't read it is because its unpatriotic to read it."

At very least, I suspect that most of our officer corp has read it for the sole point of:

Quote :

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles."

4/25/2008 12:13:23 PM

dude. it aint the military that needs to read it. It's the fucking politicians in charge of the clusterfuck who need to read it.

4/25/2008 7:11:54 PM

the enemy certainly seems to be employing its advice. mostly near the beginning of part VI

"if we wish to fight, the enemy can be forced to an engagement even though he be sheltered behind a high rampart and a deep ditch. All we must do is attack some other place that he will be obliged to relive"

"By discovering the enemy's dispositions and remaining invisible ourselves, we can keep our forces concentrated, while the enemy must be divided."

"The spot where we intend to attack must not be made known: for then the enemy will have to prepare against a possible attack at several different points; and his forces being thus distributed in many directions, the numbers we shall have to face at any given point will be proportionally few"

Sound familiar?

4/25/2008 9:26:52 PM

Reading the works of non-Americans and freedom haters is unpatriotic. However, the military does read "The abstract Art of War - George W. Bush and Co."

4/25/2008 9:31:09 PM

there aren't enough rolly eyes in the world

4/25/2008 11:10:32 PM

actually, that would be "The Art of Abstract War"

4/25/2008 11:16:14 PM

dude. it aint the military that needs to read it. It's the fucking politicians in charge of the clusterfuck tree hugging hippy liberals who need to read it. War is hell. Bad things happen. GET THE FUCK OVER IT.

4/25/2008 11:18:04 PM

^maybe you should read it. No one is saying war isn't hell. We're talking about strategy not tree hugging wars where no one gets hurt

4/25/2008 11:36:15 PM

^^

again, not enough rolly eyes in the world

4/25/2008 11:41:49 PM

Quote :

"If you know the enemy"

rofl.....the boogie man

4/25/2008 11:51:38 PM

To read != To apply

4/26/2008 3:24:48 PM