The Clausewitz Collection (merged thread)

[Bob's World]

Sadly the only possible explanation is that he never read Clausewitz, or of he did failed to understand it. The 4GW guys have never read Clausewitz either.

Almost 99% of Clausewitz critics have simply never read him, or tried to understand what he says, in an overall context. Thus they takes quotes out of context.

Sadly, 99% of Clausewitz proponents have simply never read him either.

Its just so damn hard to muddle ones way through his ramblings, and also to sort out what is an early thought on a topic, and what is his final assessment.

Is there any good, highly abridged with insightful commentary (both pro and con) version of CvC? Such a product would go a long way to clearing the air, and be far more helpful than tossing a 5 lb tome to a LT and asking him to read and understand what it ultimately means.

[William F. Owen]

Sadly, 99% of Clausewitz proponents have simply never read him either.

Maybe true, but they are generally less prone to attributing things to him, which he never said.

Its just so damn hard to muddle ones way through his ramblings, and also to sort out what is an early thought on a topic, and what is his final assessment.

Really? I know folks get easily put off, but I persevered because I knew it was important. Thank G*d I did, because from this, all else flows.
To my mind, the real problem is not actually understanding what he writes, but junking the baggage that stops most folks understanding it - eg: the hold overs from the abysmally low quality of modern military thought.

bIs there any good, highly abridged with insightful commentary (both pro and con) version of CvC? Such a product would go a long way to clearing the air, and be far more helpful than tossing a 5 lb tome to a LT and asking him to read and understand what it ultimately means.

Sure there are! Many. Some better than others, but here's a few.

Smith
Samida
Echevarria
Heuser
...and that's the short list!
I would also strongly recommend anything by Colin S. Gray as being one of the most useful demonstrators of CvC in practical terms and also a very good critic as to the things CvC simply never mentioned or just assumed.
Having that, I would argue that is actually a strength as well as a flaw - how's that for duality!!

[Firn]

Some corrections

a) France was arguably already the most prominent military power in Europe before the French Revolution

b) "The American Way of War" is in my humble optinion a misnomer. There are plenty of examples even before America was rediscovered of the concept of a nation. Switzerland may be the most famous one.

c) What changed with the French revolution was the scale of the recruitment united with a new fevor for to new form of government of the state and a more widespread sense of nation. Note that already in the medieval period quickly raised militias could prove to be an enthusiastic and steady force in defense of their homeland, and sometimes beyond it's borders. See the Battle of the Golden Spurs or the one of Sempach. Not only in such instances the will of the populance played a very great role. But as said before the scale and depth of it's importance was more present in the Napoleonic wars.

d) From the Peninsular War to the Invasion of Russia Europe witnessed many insurgencies and many instances of guerilla warfare. The Freikorps and the Tyrolean Uprisings were major events in the German-speaking areas. The influence of all of them can be seen in many parts of his work.


I already made most of my arguments in the post above. CvC discusses the concept of militias, popular uprising, their place in the overall concept of war and the strategy and tactics used in the small war (Kleinkrieg, Le petite guerre, Guerilla) only in the book of the defense. This is hardly surprising when you consider the political climate of his state.

While I have not enough time to answer in depth it seems to me that the employment of IEDs does handily fit CvC's conception as well as the general strategy of some of the insurgents in Afghanistan.

Just take a closer look at him.


Firn