Sun Tzu...

[Footslogger]

I was watching a program on the History Channel that talked about Sun Tzu's tactics that are still used today. Espcially in the Vietnam War with General Jap. What do you guys think?

[ilovestrategy]

I always felt his book was plain common sense.

[topeverest]

Strategy is by its nature is applicable across the ages with limited augmentation (usually as technology evolves). Certainly this work is one of the best known of the ancients, and the one of the oldest fully preserved texts. I think just about any military leader could quote some aspect of the work. Not that they could not qoute many other texts too...

[ilovestrategy]

Just like to get there first with the most men! [:D]

[Dobey455]

Sun Tzu is a charlatan. Try Clausewitz.

[Rusty1961]

Giap, not "Jap". [8|]

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Dobey

Sun Tzu is a charlatan. Try Clausewitz.

[8|]

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

I was watching a program on the History Channel that talked about Sun Tzu's tactics that are still used today. Espcially in the Vietnam War ...

Some of the show's conclusions abt Lee at Gettysburg were a bit of of a "reach"; Lee realized that the South couldn't win a prolonged struggle and hoped to end it prematurely in Pennsylvania: IMO, his defeat was born more out of desperation than a lack of deception, but it might have been helpful to compare the entire battlefield with the AoW's 9 types of ground.

And I would have prefered to apply the AoW to the PTO instead of the D-Day ETO.

[vinnie71]

Plus it is important to keep in mind the period/terrain/political setup under which Sun Tzu operated. The conditions of that type of warfare are relatively difficult to set up today (population too large too many population centres, speed of communications and armies in general the compostion of armies etc). Today, if one is taking on a relatively sophisticated military power, it is less possible to decieve them on and off the battlefield.
 
Also note that Sun Tzu tips on strategy should be seen as one alternative. Someone already mentioned Clauswitz who essentially reflects the western way of war (the decisive battle). One could also use the Strategicon of Maurice which somehow managed to make a balanced judgement of the military situation of the day while giving useful tips on strategy. I also believe that it has been credited as being the first time that an author came up with the combined arms approach to making war and lies somewhere between Sun Tzu and Clauswitz in method. 
 
  

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

Just like to get there first with the most men! [:D]

You forgot the most important part "and don't let anybody know you're coming!"
[:D]

[Footslogger]

Check out this vid about half way in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXafbTvdp4

[Rusty1961]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Footslogger


Some of the show's conclusions abt Lee at Gettysburg were a bit of of a "reach"; Lee realized that the South couldn't win a prolonged struggle and hoped to end it prematurely in Pennsylvania:

Actually, the South had a chance to win the War had they decided to intelligently fight the war in the West instead of the congested, restricted East.

It was foolish of the Confederacy to fight the North where they were strong as you have pointed out, they stood no chance winning a war of attrition-which is exactly the war they chose to fight.

[JWE]

ORIGINAL: Dobey
Sun Tzu is a charlatan. Try Clausewitz.

No, not really. Sun Tzu is just like Napoleon, Clausewitz, Takanaka, Charles X, Belisarius, Sulla, Joshua ben Levi, Rahotep, Sargon., and so many others.

What these folks are saying, is nothing more than what should be in the mind of a commander; how his mind comprehends the whole of an expanded battlespace. These people don't talk about tactics; that is for lesser men after they have been positioned.

Warfare is not weapons, it is not tactics, it is not little inky-dinky internet bullshit. Warfare is mind, and it is will, and it is purpose. And that's why all these guys and a gazillion others are so well studied.

[Rusty1961]

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Dobey
Sun Tzu is a charlatan. Try Clausewitz.

No, not really. Sun Tzu is just like Napoleon, Clausewitz,

Not to "ding" Clausewitz, but this thread is the first I've heard anyone say that Sun Tzu was an inferior strategist.

Hackworth had nothing but high praise for Sun Tzu.

[Rusty1961]

Actually, the United States military of the 1960s and 70's was heavily influenced by Clausewitz and they got their ass kicked by the adherents of Sun Tzu in SE Asia.

I think that pretty much closes the case.

(Sorry for the off-topic rant, but the statement at the beginning of this thread tweaked me a bit).

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Rusty1961

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: Footslogger


Some of the show's conclusions abt Lee at Gettysburg were a bit of of a "reach"; Lee realized that the South couldn't win a prolonged struggle and hoped to end it prematurely in Pennsylvania:

Actually, the South had a chance to win the War had they decided to intelligently fight the war in the West instead of the congested, restricted East.

It was foolish of the Confederacy to fight the North where they were strong as you have pointed out, they stood no chance winning a war of attrition-which is exactly the war they chose to fight.

This post is SNAFU.

[morganbj]

ORIGINAL: JWE
Warfare is not weapons .... Warfare is mind, and it is will, and it is purpose.

And while you're motivating yourself by singing Gregorian war chants, I'm dropping a few nukes on your ... head.
[:D]

[Bandkanon]

My favorite quote from Sun Tzu is

"If you know yourself and know your enemy, one hundred battles one hundred victories;
If you know yourself but do not know your enemy, then for every victory you will suffer a loss;
If you do not know yourself and do not know your enemy, you will always be defeated."

I think most Westerners miss a key aspect about Sun Tzu's Art of War, that it is not about war in its purest sense. Sun Tzu lived in the Spring and Autumn Period of China when China consisted of dozens if not hundreds of feudal states all vying for survival. His Art of War was a reflection of those times of political uncertainty, and much of it is about the relationships between the state, its ruler, and its ministers and how those roles should be used in order to initiate and complete a successful war in all of its aspects politically, culturally, and militarily.

An important second point of context is that during the Spring and Autumn Period, there were numerous teachers who were espousing their ideas about how to administer the state and its people by the ruler and his ministers. Sun Tzu was just one of them. His ideas were not of particular significance during that time. However, his most important ideas, I think, was the separation of the authority of the ruler with the command of his generals and the complete utilization of the state and its economy and society to the pursuit of war. These ideas were brought to its most distilled philosophy under the Legalists such as Han Feizi and put to brutal and efficient use by prime minister Lisi for the state of Chin. Chin in a short span of time was able to conquer the other 6 large states surrounding it and unite China under its first real emperor, Chin Shi Huangdi.

To wrap it all up, the Art of War is a strategy of patience and waiting, something the West and Americans in general are not comfortable with pursuing as a viable advantage. But if you read the news and observe the trends that China is pursuing in growing its political and economic power, you can clearly perceive that its leaders have read the Art of War and are using some of its teachings to great effect. Whether that effect is positive or negative in the long term is debatable, but Sun Tzu is certainly still alive and kicking (our American butts, again).

[jeffk3510]

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

ORIGINAL: JWE
Warfare is not weapons .... Warfare is mind, and it is will, and it is purpose.

And while you're motivating yourself by singing Gregorian war chants, I'm dropping a few nukes on your ... head.
[:D]

Amen....

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Dobey

Sun Tzu is a charlatan. Try Clausewitz.

I ALWAYS employ Sun Tzu's maxims when I play this game. Therefore sir (Removes guantlet and strikes Dobey across face). I demand satisfaction! A SHORT (no grand campaigns, I haven't the time) of your choice , and you may select the side. No houserules, except that You must play according to Clausewitz, and I Sun Tzu.


So "put your money where you mouth is", as "talk is cheap, and whiskey cost money".

And ask yourself, "Do I feel lucky? Well? Do ya, punk?" [:D]