Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Theories of war essay
Despite Clausewitz utilization of war theory as a model for explanation of 'what had happened' in warefare history, Delbruck regarded this theory as a “corrective to what the sources told us.”1 Claueseiwitz advocated the use of “historical example” to determine the nature of war. He noted the four uses that history has to offer: “an explanation, a demonstration of the application of an idea, as a support for a statement, and as a detailed presentation from which one might deduce doctrine.” He also establishes various degrees of rigour:
The first and simplest demand is for accuracy. If we read widely enough, we can develop an ability to discern and a base for comparison that will develop a feel for accuracy. The second and far greater demand is to project ourselves into the moment in time under study, not to force fit it into our won world. Only by understanding the conditions of the era and the perspectives of the people under study can we understand the rationale of their decisions and make judgements for our own time. The third and fourth are matters of logic and discipline.
Delbruck regarded this as both a good thing and bad thing for war/warefare history. This allowed to create a “synergetic relationship between theory and empiricla research long before this became the case in most other branches of history-writing.” He, however, argued that it enabled war/warefare historians to be selective with their sources, and dismiss them should they not support or “exemplify some dogma or theory.” This was amplified by the many military/war historians had “didactic functions professionally,” teachers at military institutions focused on “propounding tenets of warefare” and ignored the “uncertainties and elusiveness of past reality....
... middle of paper ...
...aphy. More importantly, it will show the students how Dulbrek enhanced military history to not only focus on technical details but to also take into account the contextual, social and economic aspects as well. He was also an advocate of history with pragmatic applications, and was able, to a degree, bring this into academia despite staunch initial rejeciton by the scholarly community; however, as this paper had earlier examined, pragamtic applications of history conflicts with histiography and this issue remains unresolved. Another reading that I was seriously considering was Carl von Clausewitz's On War, the first military historian that employed “war theory” and had the instigated the first historical shift in military histiography, but I chose Dulbrek's since his influence on the change in military historiography was the most important as this paper had examined.
...am War is not just history but the fundamental part of our history. Therefore, it needs to be taken seriously. Only if we take it seriously, can we prevent ourselves from doing the same mistakes again. It also teaches how the war policies and authorities can blind us from the real reason behind the war. It is important to also know the enemy and plan accordingly. One can clearly see that higher technologies can go wrong when accompanied with failed strategies. Most important of the all it makes the readers reconsider their definition of just-war. Most important of all, “Working-Class War: American Combat Soldiers and Vietnam” by Christian G. Appy teaches us how education and economic advantages can help us from facing the worst.
Von Clausewitz, Carl. Translated and edited by Sir Michael Howard and Peter Paret. On War. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976.
In the history of modern western civilization, there have been few incidents of war, famine, and other calamities that severely affected the modern European society. The First World War was one such incident which served as a reflection of modern European society in its industrial age, altering mankind’s perception of war into catastrophic levels of carnage and violence. As a transition to modern warfare, the experiences of the Great War were entirely new and unfamiliar. In this anomalous environment, a range of first hand accounts have emerged, detailing the events and experiences of the authors. For instance, both the works of Ernst Junger and Erich Maria Remarque emphasize the frightening and inhumane nature of war to some degree – more explicit in Jünger’s than in Remarque’s – but the sense of glorification, heroism, and nationalism in Jünger’s The Storm of Steel is absent in Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front. Instead, they are replaced by psychological damage caused by the war – the internalization of loss and pain, coupled with a sense of helplessness and disconnectedness with the past and the future. As such, the accounts of Jünger and Remarque reveal the similar experiences of extreme violence and danger of World War I shared by soldiers but draw from their experiences differing ideologies and perception of war.
In conclusion, while books, photos, movies and other historical documentation can portray information or a message about wartime events, they will never be able to produce the feelings of those that were personally involved in wars have experienced. Yet, it is incorrect to criticize these writers. The information they reveal is still very important historical information. Even if a reader or viewer of this media cannot feel exactly the same emotions as those involved, they still often experience an emotional connection to the events being depicted. This is important, not only for the historical knowledge gained about wars, but also to understand the nature and futility of their occurrence.
Another unique aspect to this book is the constant change in point of view. This change in point of view emphasizes the disorder associated with war. At some points during the book, it is a first person point of view, and at other times it changes to an outside third person point of view. In the first chapter of the book, “The Things They Carried,” O’Brien writes, “The things they carried were largely determined by necessity (2).
The Young People of Today, a series of opinion polls conducted among young educated Frenchmen by Henri Massis and Alfred de Tarde find romantic sentiments for war much like von Treitschke. The two authors interviewed a professor who tried to explain that there were in fact unjust wars, however, according to the professor, “the class obviously did not follow me; they rejected that distinction” (Massis and de Tarde 224). Massis and de Tarde go on to write about the many young men who left their high studies to pursue lives as soldiers because for them “it is not enough, for them to learn history: they are making it” (Massis and de Tarde 224).
He notes, “So we knew a war existed; we had to believe that, just as we had to believe that the name for the sort of life we had led for the last three years was hardship and suffering. Yet we have no proof of it. In fact, we had even less than no proof; we had thrust into our faces the very shabby and unavoidable obverse of proof.” (94). Because he has not seen the battles, he has difficulty acknowledging the reality of war.
For the great lesson which history imprints on the mind…is the tragic certainty that all wars gain their ultimate ends, whether great or petty, by the violation of personality, by the destruction of homes, by the paralysis of art and industry and letters…even wars entered on from high motives must rouse greed, cupidity, and blind hatred; that even in defensive warfare a people can defend its rights only by inflicting new wrongs; and that chivalrous no less than self-seeking war entails relentless destruction.
Review of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" 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 concludes how all of his world experiences tie together. Throughout his book, he unifies themes present in all the 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 constant battle between death and love.
The Forgotten Soldier is not a book concerning the tactics and strategy of the German Wehrmacht during the Second World War. Nor does it analyze Nazi ideology and philosophy. Instead, it describes the life of a typical teenage German soldier on the Eastern Front. And through this examined life, the reader receives a first hand account of the atrocious nature of war. Sajer's book portrays the reality of combat in relation to the human physical, psychological, and physiological condition.
Jaspers, Karl. The Question of German Guilt. Trans. E. B. Ashton. New York: The Dial P, 1947.
It is interesting and even surprising that the two major strategies regarding war were developed by European contemporaries of the late eighteenth and nineteenth century. Antoine Henri de Jomini (1779-1869) approached his philosophy of war in a structured, scientific manner. Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) took a more fluid, open-ended approach to his philosophy of war. The fact that they lived during the same time period in Europe is also fascinating in that they likely knew of each others’ writings as well as potentially influenced and were influenced by the philosophy of the other. Jomini’s scientific approach is more applicable to the tactical and operational levels of war while Clausewitz approaches war as more of an art or interaction between people that is more appropriate to the strategic and political levels of war. Although their two war strategies are presented as opposing strategies, by comparing concepts from each of the theorists to the other theorist’s work shows that they are actually more complementary than competing in that they are addressing different levels of war. The concepts to be evaluated are Clausewitz’s “Trinity of War”, “war as a continuation of politics”, and the “unpredictability of war” as well as Jomini’s definition of strategy and his “Fundamental Principle of War”.
The Weimar years were marked by extraordinary and unrivaled economic, political, and social struggles and crises. Its beginning was marked as being especially difficult in that Germany was wiped out and devastated after four years of the unprecedented warfare of World War I. By 1918 the world had been shocked with over 8.5 million killed on both Allies and Axis sides and many more severely mangled and scarred – body, mind and spirit. This is seen as German Soldier, Ernst Simmel, writes, “when I speak about the war as an event, as the cause of illness, I anticipate something has revealed...namely that it is not only the bloody war which leaves such devastating traces in those who took part in it. Rather, it is also the difficult conflict in which the individual finds himself in his fight against a world transformed by war. Either in the trenches or at home can befall a single organ, or it may encompass the entire person” (Simmel, 1918). For Ernst, and millions of other participants, the war had turned forever changed their world.
Amongst military theorists and practitioners who studied war, its origin and implications, Carl von Clausewitz assumes a place among the most prominent figures. With his book On War, he demonstrated his capability to provide thorough historical analysis and conclusions of the conflicts in which he was engaged, and as a philosopher he reflected about all encompassing aspects of war. Today, Western armies conduct modern warfare in a dynamic environment composed of flexible and multiple threats in which civilians form a substantial part. Studying Clausewitz provides current military and political leadership useful insights to understand twenty-first century warfare. He explains the nature of war, provides an analytical tool to understand the chaos of warfare, and he argues for well educated and adaptable leadership capable of creative thinking. Although he died before his work was complete, his writing style was ambiguous and unclear at some moments, and current technology reduced some of his tactics obsolete, his work still arouses and inspires military and political strategists and analysts.
Barnes had discovered that a more nearly accurate version of the history of the First World War was only possible after the fighting had ended and the emotional excesses had lessened. He was unable to predict that similar corrections of Allied propaganda and popularized conceptions of the methods of warfare in the Second World War would meet even sterner resistance.