Robert M. Citino's latest work attempts to determine whether there is a uniquely German style of fighting wars. Although he really does not examine the Thirty Years' War so much as its aftermath and the focus until 1871 is, of course, on the Prussian military and not those of other Germanic states, Citino does identify what he considers a German way of war. Citino's thesis is that Prussia, largely due to its position amidst other powers, developed a tradition of fighting "'short and lively' wars" (p. xiii) which emphasized the rapid maneuver and an aggressive spirit of attacking the enemy whenever possible, preferably with a flanking movement of some sort. To achieve this latter objective, field commanders were given considerable leeway to …show more content…
Citino cites ample evidence to show that Germany, and Prussia before it, had always sought to fight short wars because of its paucity of resources and central position in Europe. Short wars necessitated speed, audacity and nimble operational maneuvers. In turn, these priotities required commanders to be aggressive and seize the earliest possible moment to try to force a battlefield decision. Citino presents repeated examples of this pattern as a hallmark of Prussian/German operations from the seventeenth century to the early phase of World War II. For Citino, this is the German way of war: a war of movement intended to bring a sudden and decisive victory. Simply put, Citino sees that Germany (and Prussia before it) simply did not have the luxury of time in fighting, which necessitated the development of Bewegungskrieg early on in the Prussian military tradition. For Citino, blitzkrieg merely constitutes the effective adaptation of new technologies to this traditional Prussian/German style of …show more content…
Yet Citino tends to neglect the impact of broader social, economic and cultural factors on military affairs. For example, little attention is paid to the impact of the paucity of resources on Prussia's war-making capabilities, one of the main factors behind Prussia's need for quick victories. Citino writes nothing about the role of nationalism as a motivational factor for troops. This omission seems significant, given scholars' wide acceptance of the claim that the spread of nationalism greatly facilitated both the growth of military forces and the reliability of the average soldier to perform a wide array of duties without immediate supervision, particularly those involving speed and offensive actions. Indeed, the book makes no mention of how growth in education, literacy and technological skill encouraged this development as well. Certainly, these issues would not command extensive attention in a book of this sort, but incorporating the useful findings of the New Military History might have been better than simply setting it up as a straw
Overall McPherson’s reasons for the soldiers motivations were clear and concise, easy to follow and understand allowing for easy interpretation of the book. McPherson also includes multiple quotes from various letters and diary entries to support his statements which gives his statements credibility. The reasons for motivation presented in the book were convincing and were supported by numerous quotes.
World War I is marked by its extraordinary brutality and violence due to the technological advancement in the late 18th century and early 19th century that made killing easier, more methodical and inhumane. It was a war that saw a transition from traditional warfare to a “modern” warfare. Calvary charges were replaced with tanks; swords were replaced with machine guns; strategic and decisive battles were r...
Militarily, from 1870 until 1914, most of Europe was arming itself at the rate never seen before in history. Desiring security and power, along with the conflict and tension during this time period forced all of the major powers involved in World War One to increase its military expenditures by at least 200%. Although Germany led this trend by a large margin, the desired effect – security and power – was difficult to attain, as the proportional rate that each country grew by was essentially the same as what it had begun with. Coinciding with this growth was the drastic change from a ‘defensive’ military mindset to one with a more aggressive tone. The French, taking a defensive stance during the 1870 Franco-Prussian War and Russia’s similar strategy against the Japanese in 1904-05, allowed for more of an aggressive military approach to take root. This is exemplified through the finalization of the German military strategy to quickly defeat France in case of war. Known as the Schlieffen Plan, it was developed in 1905.
But what would ultimately lead to the outbreak of the first world war was Germany’s ever-increasing belief in militarism. The German military power had continued to grow as their industrial sector did the same; such power was seen as a symbol of national pride by the government. Other nations had built up their arms stockpiles as well, though they did not glorify it nearly as much as the Germans did. Nevertheless, the availability of arms, when combined with other political and economic factors, meant that a full-scale conflict was all but unavoidable.
I learned many things about Philip Caputo and his tour of duty. He described how he felt in the beginning about the Vietnamese people, which was not as much hate since him and the other soldiers were not as knowledgeable about all the conflict that was taking place in Vietnam. Caputo was very opinionated towards his views of the Vietnamese people. He actually felt sorry for all the villagers who had to see and deal with the negative environment that was brought upon them, and bear the Marines who probed their homes for prohibited Viet Cong relations. Caputo did not find it fair how the American troops mistreated the villagers and protected the concept of apprehending the Viet Cong. However, throughout the end of his tour, he and his men disliked the VC very strongly, learned how to hate and wanted to kill them.
In a recent verbal bout with my History of the Military Art professor, I contended that the true might of a nation may be inversely proportional to the size of its military during peacetime. My thinking, though perhaps idealistic, was that the maintenance of a large military during relative international tranquility is an overt admission of weakness and increases the likelihood of unnecessarily employing that force—it is contextually irrelevant. Instead, I proposed that a strong and stable economy is the best metric of national prowess, for such an economy can resource many opportunities as they arise. On the contrary, a robust standing military has a much narrower utility. To be sure, this author is not one that intentionally seeks to take an interdisciplinary approach to academia, but the connection seems relevant given the nature of this assignment. Whereas a nation may accomplish a strategic goal through military force, a leader may accomplish a task relying upon coercive power; whereas a nation may transform and develop the world through its economic strength and versatility, a versatile leader may transform others through the employment of one or many leader development principles—both theoretically based and experientially acquired. This piece serves to describe acquired PL499 course concepts and their relevance to my project team and the West Point Leader Development System (WPLDS). Only through a...
Warfare was in a state of transition. Older commanders and generals in the French and British militaries were very cavalry and infantry focused. These commanders believed that cavalry, infantry, and artillery would assure victory in any circumstance, against any foe. They clung to the static tactics of the bygone World War I era. World War I had been fought primarily on French soil, and the military as well as the government never wanted that to happen again, therefore they wanted to reinforce their main border against any future German. Little did they know that only twenty two years later they would be bested by German forces in a way that would shock the world. This research will be analyzing many important assumptions, oversights,...
To carry on, prior to World War I, numerous wars such as the American Civil War, the Napoleonic Wars, or the Opium War of China had been fought, but mostly for the sole purposes of territorial expansion or acquiring resources. However, “World War I was greeted with incredible enthusiasm. Each of the major belligerents was convinced of the rightness of its cause, demonstrating the power of nationalism.” (William J. Duiker and Jackson J. Spielvogel, World History, vol. 2, 667). After the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the views of war changed drastically, and a new romantic idea about the war was born. War was now perceived as a great opportunity to prove an individual’s or nation’s greatness. “Now, God be thanked Who has matched us with His hour,
Since the unification of Germany in the late 19th century, attitudes of nationalism, Prussian militarism and expansionism saturated German society. As one can clearly see in the writings of the influential German historian, Heinrich von Treitschke, war and territorial expansion were seen as being necessary to the preservation and advancement of German society. He states that, “War is for an afflicted people the only remedy… Those who preach the nonsense about everlasting peace do not understand the life of the Aryan race, the Aryans are before all brave.” The mobilization of the people and resources, for the purpose of making war, were believed to be the means of preservation and advancement of German society. These ultra-nationalistic attitudes and beliefs resulted in widespread German enthusiasm with the coming of war in 1914. As expressed in a German newspaper, The Post, “Another forty years of peace would be a national misfortune for Germany.”
The Prussian Army relied upon the service of mercenaries and by plan, minimized the use of townspeople from the Prussian sovereigns to fill any remaining requirements, and only required short service terms. This manning approach had two economic benefits; it maximized the number of people left in the w...
Nationalism influenced people’s thoughts about war, twisting their minds to believe that their government and military was supreme and would win a war quickly. Because “most European countries, with the exception of France and Prussia, had not had any major wars within the 19th century, they stepped into the 20th century thinking that they were immune to defeat. This idea of immunity developed as countries forgot of their past wars and sufferings. The British were confident in their naval forces, the Germans in their arms and ships, and the Russians thought their land was protected by God. Citizens strongly believed that their country was the best and would do just about anything to help their country. It became a school boy’s duty to enlist in the army upon his graduation. As Erich Maria Remarque states in his book, All Quiet on the Western Front, the “young men of twenty... whom Kantorek calls the ‘Iron Youth,’” are the ones sent off to war in Germany. Their teachers drilled this message into their minds from a young age. The boys were told that it was their duty to their country to fight. Zara Steiner, British Historian, related that British teachers were told “to teach boys that success in w...
Clausewitz's On War, first published in 1832, until now remains one of the most influential studies in understanding character, nature and conditions of warfare. In his book Clausewitz not only traced an interaction of intension and planning with the realities of combat, but by exploring the relationship of war to policy, politics and society gave a new philosophical justification to the art of war. (Heuser, 2002)
The Guns of August by Barbara W. Tuchman condensed the opening drama of The Great War into 440 pages. “Europe as a powder keg” is easily described and articulated through analysis of the belligerents’ pre-war operations and alliances. Barbara Tuchman is a Pulitzer Prize winning historian and journalist, her main focus centers around geopolitical affairs. Tuchman’s analysis of the first thirty days of the war demonstrates how inadequate each nation’s military was at the wars onset. The Guns of August present the reader with the primary factors of the disposition, political, and initial combat operations that shaped the First World War. However, the Author’s writing style was the forefront in conveying to the reader that Europe was foolishly
The whole of Paul Bäumer’s class joined the army voluntarily due to Kantorek’s rhetoric on nationalism. National pride is portrayed as outdated and only useful for national leaders seeking to control the populace. Yet it become rather crass when it drives men and countries blindly forward to death and ruin. It is this very same force that is drove Kantorek’s students to join the army, and for that they abhorred him. The other characters’ quickly learned how pointless pride was on the battlefield and in the trenches. Paul f...
Because the leaders and commanders of WWI forever changed the nature of war, it influenced the later Nazi leaders decisions, and forced the next set of Allies to adapt to an entirely new concept of total war as i...