Essay title: War
Many have pondered the question “What is war?” with very few ever reaching a consensus. If a consensus is reached, it is categorically remarked with criticism. Virtually every interpretation of the term “war” has had its meaning argued. The nature of the beliefs of war is intricate and this dissertation try’s to ascertain an extensive understanding of its landscape and the relations that are common to any philosophical investigation of the topic. War defined by Websters Dictionary is a state of open and declared, hostile armed conflict between states or nations, or a period of such conflict.
The Greeks developed what has been referred to as the Western way of war. A confrontation of soldiers in an open field displaying their courage, skill, honor, and an associated repugnance for decoy. A battle was a test of intelligence and bravery, intended to accentuate honor and to protect the innocent. General Carl Von Clausewitz defined “War therefore is an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfill our will. ” Classical armies usually did not attack cities. They were not equipped for a war of that size. They lacked the artillery, and could not afford the time and expense of a long battle.
When invading, the army would cross the border, and their defenders usually marched out from their walled cities for a battle on some nearby plain. They simply could not allow an enemy to occupy their farmlands. Victor Davis Hanson, a farmer and the author of numerous excellent pieces on Greek warfare had argued that the idea of “agricultural destruction during the Greek hoplite wars had been greatly overstated. He also felt the Greek way of war instilled them distaste for terrorist, guerrilla, or any irregular who chose to wage war unconventionally, and is unwilling to die on the battlefield in order to kill his enemy. ” Timing was nearly everything for an invading enemy. The Greek’s fought in the phalanx. A body of heavily armed infantry formed in close deep ranks and files of mass array of people, animals, or objects. The Greeks used young and old men in their battles. Young men had the advantage of speed but not necessarily endurance or strength. Old men had the advantage of experience; their presence steadied the ranks.
The key to a successful use of the phalanx was a tight arrangement. In the climax of battle, it was critical for men to stay in rank regardless of wounds and fatigue in order to maintain the reliability of the phalanx. During battle, it was necessary to tighten the arrangement persistently. Precise training, and high confidence, was necessary for the phalanx to work and to assure the soldiers would not hesitate in the fiercest battles. The men in the front led the physical attack, and those in the rear pushed. Xenophon, a student of Socrates, suggested that the strongest fighters be positioned at the front and the rear of the phalanx and the weakest in the middle in order that they might be led by the previous and pushed by the last.
The development of the chariot, led by horses, was a major advancement in the effectiveness of warfare. The chariot was very similar to our present day tank. The design of the chariot was continually improved upon, along with the breeding of larger more commanding horses better matched for pulling a chariot on the battlefield. The chariot was not only functional on the battlefield due to size, but it also allowed for one or more people to assist with the actual fighting while someone else directed the chariot. The development of gun powder was yet