Carl Von Clausewitz: The Vietnam War

days, to profect the plan. The plan became unbearable, the plan was perfect nothing was in the Athens clan way to victory.

On War is not just a manuscript on of how to understand war; it also provides insight into what Clausewitz thought about the dynamics of human thinking. Similar to what Claxton outlined in Hare Brain, Tortoise Mind, Clausewitz believed that, “knowledge must be absorbed into the mind that it almost ceases to exist in a separate, objective way.” (Clausewitz, p147). In other words, Clausewitz believed knowledge

Vietnam, or Viet Nam, is a Southeast Asian country located on the South China sea. It was formerly a colony of the French, and still, has a lot of French landmarks and food. It is a communist country that used to be split in two, Southern Vietnam supporting Capitalism, and Northern Vietnam supporting communism before the Vietnamese War straightened everything out.

Carl von Clausewitz, born in Burg bei Magdeburg, Prussia, was a general and a military theorist. He was influenced by the Napoleonic wars in which he fought. He served in both the Prussian and Russian army, and played an important role in initiating an alliance between Prussia, Russia and Great Britain against Napoleon. He served as the director of the Prussian War College and wrote his masterpiece On War, a work on the philosophy of war. His main goal was to examine war in all its aspects. Clausewitz includes a chapter in his book where he explains and discusses his ideas about the concept of “people’s war”.

Every county on this planet is different. Each one has its own unique culture and interests. Some countries have similar cultures or they share the same interests, but there are countries that have almost nothing in common. One country might be a monarchy that believes biscuits are the best thing to eat for breakfast, while another country is a republic that believes muffins are better than biscuits. They might be completely different but one has a good supply of cheese and the other of fruit, so they work out an agreement to put their differences aside and make trading deals. However, sometimes these countries cannot overlook the differences between them and the countries are in conflict. War in not a pleasant thing, but it is one way of solving a conflict. Although it can help, it can also make things worse. Wars have been a great part of America’s History. From the beginning of America’s exists it had to fight Britain for its independence and now it is at war with Afghanistan. For the last 14 year America has sent its troops to Afghanistan, and in doing so America has lost a lot of money and has now lost its purpose in continuing the war. The war started after a terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, to fight against terrorist groups that were responsible for the attack. American leaders never realized this would be the longer war in American history.

Warfare involves many characteristics from ideologies such as Fredrick the Great and Clausewitz that guided their philosophies and theories on war. However, it was Clausewitz who introduced and stressed the importance of the paradoxical trinity of war - Emotion, Reason, and Chance. A logical, organized way of thinking and understanding the social dynamics, as well as the complexities of the political and military realities into the Western military that brought about real-life implications. While applicable during Frederick the Great era the paradoxical trinity was not prevalent as it is now in today’s modern society.

II. Major Point A Clausewitz contends that the art of war is more an art than a science.

Carl Von Clausewitz is a Prussian soldier who wrote about warfare and strategies that he achieved while in combat. He was very influential. One of his very known works would be his article, “On War”. In this article he argues mainly in his first chapter, what is war and also what does the meaning of war pertain to. I will summarize two sections of his article that relate to his argument as well as analyzing his argument. Do I believe his argument on what war is is valid? Are his strategies on warfare achievable?

The post WWII era has been a period that generated several changes in how commanders have driven the war. The art of war has extend contributions of Carl Von Clausewitz. The long process of maturation of his theories took several years. During this period, Clausewitz wrote and re-wrote his ideas concerning war. Because the time since On War was written it seems Clausewitz’s theories are useless or invalid, however, conflicts since 1945 have validated most of Clausewitz’s theories, which are a school of thoughts that remain adequate for explaining warfare in the current century. The purpose of this paper is to explain how conflicts since 1945 have validated the theories of Carl Von Clausewitz. Finally, conclusions suggest the significance to today’s military profession.

The idea of warfare tries to help us discover how we may proceed to physically force or gain material advantage of the opposition at a starting point. However, it is not always considered possible, this theory can teach us how to calculate moral factors, and anticipate the mistakes the enemy will make. Clausewitz’s definition implies that war does not lead to the destruction of the enemy but rather the survival of the enemy to its will. Clausewitz’s definition implies that war does not lead to the destruction of the enemy but rather the survival of the enemy to its will. What Clausewitz is saying is that Public opinion influences military doctrine; military’s will influences public opinion While the Military strategy influences political objectives;

Conflicts in Vietnam began in 1945 but the official war did not start until the election of Ngo Dinh Diem in 1955. Before World War II, Vietnam was French’s territory. During WWII, Japanese overtook the Vietnam but ended up leaving short after when WWII ended. This gave France the chance to gained control of South Vietnam and the North was under communist rule of China under Ho Chi Minh. Under Ho Chi Minh’s rules people in the north were treated badly because people had no power of their own. Later, Chinese left the North, so Ho Chi Minh took control of the whole North. This gave French the opportunity to fight to regain control of the North so they could have the whole Vietnam. The United States was aiding France with military and other aids

In conclusion, war should be the last resort to any conflict. After reading the Sun Tzu and Machiavelli, war requires five fundamentals, standards, tactics and critical thinking. War should be thought through carefully because there are consequence and unrepairable ramifications that not only affect us as an individual

Military theorists Carl von Clausewitz and Baron Antoine Henri de Jomini both fought during the Napoleonic Era. However, their experiences created completely different theories of the nature of war. Because Clausewitz understood that war is not static or systematic and that commanders and soldiers influence the outcome of war, Clausewitz best distinguishes the nature of war, specifically through his concepts of strategy and morale. This will be illustrated through the events and actions taken during Operation ANACONDA.

From Von Clausewitz, known as the Prussian military thinker with influence on the modern organizations of mass violence in the West, and Karl Marx on the economic experiments of Russia, warfare is continuance of politics with the combination of other means (). War is typically not the goal itself, but rather, it

Introduction: Jomini and Clausewitz contributed immensely to theories on the nature of World War I, and Bassford asserts that the similarities of their writing stem from the following: a common interest in the campaigns of Frederick the Great, their experience during the Napoleonic Wars and frequent reading of each other’s writing.1 However, Bassford still believes their military theory approaches were not identical. Like Jomini, Clausewitz found his point of departure in Napoleonic war; but he was concerned less with the particulars of Napoleonic campaigns than with a search for the inner nature of war, and his consequent abstractness diminished his