I am often re-minded by the supposed intellectualist who professes to understand the process and ideologies behind war that one must eventually become a specificist. I disagree and I maintain that in order to study war... one must be do what the master practioners of it for over 3000 years now have done. And that..... is the study of those same master practioners and analysts who have demonstrably influenced it's developement and usage as a political tool.
For that.. as has been pointed out by many.... for centuries is what war is....politics through force.
Because with that also in mind...one, imo, soon learns that to be the generalist is what leads to being a specificist.... in any region or era or in dealing with the application and developement of tactics -strategy-logistics-weaponry and the Operational Art...if one so wishes to do.
Consequently from time to time I intend to cite known works and give a brief description of their subsequent impact or practicality that may or may not yet be seen in the now first closing decade of the 21st Ce.
And there's no better beginning point then when we cite Sun Tsu's remarkable classic "The Art of War".
Varying sources will relate that the author was a senior General of the Kingdom of Wu ca. late 6th ce. B.C. And the anctedotes abound about him as his accomplishments again based on source. It's a relative short work and yet with it's 13 chapters is considered to be the most significant of its time and considered one of the seven great military classics ever produced in China.
Now having said that I must also point out that it's been postulated that it is actually a compliation of a number of others, dictums and possible transcriptions. And it is apt to note that well before it's alleged publication the operational art in China had been ongoing in developement for probably 2000 previous years.
Ntl it's impact has been and remains signficant if not only the way historical military doctrine would continue to be developed in China but... as an example, in many cases, certainly as regard postioning-rapidity of movement and intellegence gathering and it's effects.... a fore runner of what later has becom known in various nations as 'principals of war'. For indeed 'The Art of War' has done just that.
I am not as huge a fan of the postulation that decison making processes as regards an armed force must be objective and subjective in the analysis of an opponets courses of actions....as some. But then again a 5 paragraph operations order or formalized intelligence estimate were not available for use in the 6th ce. and consequently that approach for the contextual era in which it became famous was probably the best that could be arrived at.
It has influenced military planners..analysists..politicans and leaders of industry and commerce. And without hesitation one would do no worse then begin a study of great classic military treasties by beginning here.
I highly recommend to the layman and professional alike to re/peruse it's 'pearls of wisdom'.
Certainly if one attempts to appreciate that human phenomena known as war.
Thanks
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 07-Apr-2011 at 21:23