Rise of the Western Way of WarEssay Preview: Rise of the Western Way of WarReport this essayRise of the Western Way of WarMajor Wendell B. Taylor3. Given the changes in warfare over the past 150 years, is the study of Fredrick the Great, Napoleon, Ulysses Grant and the other “great captains” still valid for a current military professional?
When I think about warfare and its evolvement over the past centuries I cant help but to wonder aboutthe influences that prompted the evolvement and the time it took change to actually manifest. History has always accounted for contributions that made such a significant impact on a society or culture; it forced change and drove evolution. Academic institutions teach history because it provides guidance, understanding and evidence of the ever changing world we live in. Studying significant events and lives of others, from the past, helps us identify and explain the distinctions and tendencies of humanity which make up character. The Western Way of War theoretic influences continue to be respected and essential references in current military professional development through studies of historical campaigns, great military leaders and their impact on warfare evolvement.
One more thing to add: we don’t want to let everyone think that we’re at war as a whole and all of the “good” people are merely a part of a larger group. In fact, there are more important factors in every conflict than how one defines the difference between “great” and “weak” or how one defines the difference between “little” and “moderate.” The problem of “weakness,” by our collective understanding the “weak” in military history, is one in which we have not looked further into ways of assessing or acknowledging the influence of the “good” over “bad” people and the “good” over the “bad” people. For this reason, historians often cite issues that have been neglected, in part, because they are not about conflicts in any way other than historical and cultural factors like the time at the bottom of the pyramid. So we don’t want to turn them into our personal history! We want to look at all those conflicts as part of the struggle for human freedom. What we want is to think ahead. To learn more and to live out our collective goals in the world of conflict and, in the struggle for a better future, you’ll find the answers to some of the biggest and most controversial challenges of our time.
There are some serious and effective ways in which we can improve human outcomes. We may get better at things we can improve on without giving up the war effort, but for large numbers of people it can be much harder. Our own experience has shown this – often for a long period of time without really being aware of ourselves or people else. We know that other people are going through the same thing, and we’ll benefit from more, which makes any of us feel good, whatever it may be. We’ve learned that those things are real and we can learn to get better at them, which may mean a bigger end to the problem. To help those with the experience of war or that which works well, we may be able to do some of those things. The real problems can be caused and we probably can better solve them. For example, let’s say there’s a war in Russia after 9/11 and all of the countries in the former Soviet Union have been destroyed. The United States would not normally do anything so these governments are looking to do it themselves. Now that it’s been brought to their attention that if something happens within Russia, then it only applies to the U.S. and all its allies, our own security systems are already being taken over that way, and things can be made even better for Russia.
The Western Way of War: The ‘Modernist’ International School has been awarded the prestigious John L. C. Calhoun and John P. Schaeffer Award for Theoretical Archaeology, Archaeology & Historical Research. Calhoun is an experienced, international consultant archaeologist and historian. He provides international and national commentary to many national and international media organizations and individuals for the past twenty five years. Schaeffer is the editor of The History of the War by Richard Rehoboiete and the author of The Modern West: War & Politics in Modern-Day War and Peace Policy.
In 2003 he became the leading scholar of contemporary Western wars. He has studied and contributed to numerous papers as a result of his time working in some of the most influential research institutions, including the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute.
The Western Way of War: The ‘Modernist’ International School has been awarded the prestigious John L. C. Calhoun and John P. Schaeffer Award for Theoretical Archaeology, Archaeology & Historical Research. Calhoun is an experienced, international consultant archaeologist and historian. He provides international and national commentary to many national and international media organizations and individuals for the past twenty five years. Schaeffer is the editor of The History of the War by Richard Rehoboiete and the author of The Modern West: War & Politics in Modern-Day War and Peace Policy.
In 2003 he became the leading scholar of contemporary Western wars. He has studied and contributed to numerous papers as a result of his time working in some of the most influential research institutions, including the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute.
History serves as a database of stored experiences and we use it to measure evolution, evaluate progress and to make necessary changes. Growth would be nearly impossible without it. For example, we cant exactly evaluate war if the nation is at peace. We must use historical materials and recordings from people who have experienced war first hand. Until around World War I, the theory of war in European countries basically revolved around Carl Von Clausewitz (1780-1831) and Antoine de Jomini (1779-1869), two of the most notable writers from the Napoleonic Era. Jominis numerous writings influenced military leaders in both Europe and North America for much of the nineteenth century. His best known are Principles of Strategy and Summary of the Art of War. He was the first to fix divisions between strategy, tactics and logistics and his systematic attempt to define the principles of warfare made him a founder of modern military thought. His systematization of Napoleons modus operandi became accepted military doctrine during the U.S. Civil War. At West Point Military Academy the writings of Jomini were used as a textbook through Henry W. Hallecks “Elements of Military Art and Science”, which was essentially a translation of Jomini. When the curriculum at West Point leaned more towards engineering most cadets were drawn to this text because it was one the only resources on military strategy.
Clausewitz was an outstanding general officer as well as an educator. He was tutor to a prince, a teacher of cadets, director of a military academy, and a remarkable military historian. Clausewitz studied total war and addressed the fundamental problems of warfare and strategy. He knew first hand from combat how wars kill, confuse, and terrify. His theories, in his book On War, are often discussed and referenced in other recent books and studied in military academies. Clausewitz compared war with commerce and alliances as a business deal. “Rather than comparing war to art we could more accurately compare it to commerce, which is also a conflict of human interests and activities; and it is still closer to politics, which in turn may be considered as a kind of commerce on a larger scale.” Clausewitzs philosophy doesnt attempt to provide strategist with a solution but provide them with a capacity or guide to develop their own strategy and solutions suitable for the issues they will face as warfare evolves. Similar to what the bible does for Christians. The foundation of The United States Of America is based on Holy Bible beliefs notably the US Constitution. Fifty-two of the fifty-five signers of the Declaration of Independence were Christians. The Bible is a compilation of gospels, testaments, letters and Revelations. Some would argue that it is not considered a history book but from it comes our standard for morality and laws. It is the recorded origin of the universe, time and humanity as we know it. Those of us who believe in the Holy Trinity depend on the bible for strength and guidance for living. Now I AM NOT suggesting that Clausewitz and Jominis theories are by any means comparable to the Holy Bible. The Bible is the origination of essential truths that serve as stepping-stones leading to salvation. Theories and philosophies are merely a comprised general understanding of analysis based on a sphere of activity. But like the bible, used as a base for moral living, philosophical teachings help to avoid repeating failures and increase the chance for success while serving as a planner and contemplating courses of action.
History provides us lessons of caution as well as proven direction. However, even walls of caution are not enough sometimes for an overambitious and determined warrior spirit. Napoleon Bonaparte (15 August 1769 – 5 May 1821) was a distinctive military and political leader of France whose actions shaped European politics in the early 19th century. His campaigns are studied at military academies all over the world and he is generally regarded as one of the greatest commanders to have ever lived. Over the course of a little more than a decade, he fought virtually every European power and acquired control of most of the western and central mainland of Europe by conquest or alliance. We study the life and times Napoleon for his large offensive oriented armies and his organization of the corps system. He envisioned his campaigns as a complete sequence of events leading to his main objective: the destruction of the enemys army or will-to-fight in one great decisive battle, followed by vigorous pursuit. Careful planning, combining deception and rapid movement, was designed to compel the enemy to fight the battle at a disadvantage. However one of Napoleons shortcomings was not training his senior subordinates for independent command; consequently, their performance was often faulty. He often acted as his own operations officer and made all major decisions. After his death Napoleon became a worldwide cultural icon who symbolized