Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
For anyone who is interested (sorry about the formatting – not sure everything carried through the “cut & paste”
BibliographyBassford, Christopher. Clausewitz in English: The Reception of Clausewitz in Britain and America 1815-1945. New York: Oxford University Press. 1994.---. ?Clausewitz and His Works? Lecture at the Army War College, 1992. Available from http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/Bassford/Cworks/Works.htm (accessed February 28, 2011).Betts, Richard K. ?Conventional Strategy: New Critics, Old Choices.? International Security, Vol. 7, No. 4 (Spring 1983), pp. 140-162. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2626735 (accessed February 28, 2011).Beyerchen, Alan. ?Clausewitz, nonlinearity, and the Unpredictability of War.? International Security, Vol. 17, No. 3 (Winter, 1992-1993), pp. 59-90. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2539130 (accessed March 2, 2011).Brodie, Bernard. ?A Guide to Reading On War.? In On War. Edited and Translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 641-714. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.---. ?In Quest of the Unknown Clausewitz.? Review of Clausewitz and the State, by Peter Paret. International Security, Vol. 1, No.3 (Winter 1977). 62-69. http://jstor.org/stable/2626655 (Accessed March 2, 2011).---. ?The Continuing Relevance of On War.? In On War. Edited and Translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 45-58. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.Bruscino, Thomas. ?Clausewitz and Contemporary War.? Review of Clausewitz and Contemporary War by Antulio J. Echevarria II. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Joint Forces Quarterly, Issue 56, 1st Quarter 2010.Cannon, Maj. Michael W. ?Clausewitz For Beginners.? Airpower Journal, Summer 1989. http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj89/cannon.html (accessed April 4, 2011)Clausewitz, Carl von. On War. Edited and Translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.Cohen, Carl. Communism, Fascism, and Democracy: The Theoretical Foundations, 2nd ed. New York: Random House, 1972),English, Allan D. Changing Face of War: Learning from History. Montreal: McGill-Queen?s University Press, 1998. Available from: http://site.ebrary.com/lib/apus/edf.action?p00=&docID=10141529Fleming, Bruce. ?Can Reading Clausewitz Save Us from Future Mistakes?? Parameters: U.S. Army War College, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Spring 2004), pp. 62-76. http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/ (accessed February 28, 2011).Fischer, David Hackett. Historians? Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. New York: Harper Perennial, 1970. Fontenot, Col. Gregory. ?Decision Making in War? Review of How Wars End: Why we Always Fight the Last Battle by Gideon Rose. Army Magazine, Vol. 61, No. 4, April 2011.Gallie, W.B. ?Clausewitz Today.? European Journal of Sociology Vol. 19, No. 1 (1978), pp. 142-167. Available from APUS library as PDF document.Gardner, Nikolas. ?Resurrecting the ?Icon?: The Enduring Relevance of Clausewitz?s On War.? Strategic Studies Quarterly. Vol. 3, No. 1 (Spring 2009) 119-133.Gat, Azar. ?Clausewitz and the Marxists: Yet Another Look.? Journal of Contemporary History Vol. 27, No. 2 (Apr 1992), pp. 363-382. http://www.jstor.org/stable/260915 (accessed March 2, 2011).Gray, Colin S. ?Clausewitz, history, and the future strategic world.? In The Past as Prologue: The Importance of History to the Military Profession. Edited by Williamson Murray and Richard Hunt Sinnreich, 111-132. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 2006Handel, Michael I. ?Who is Afraid of Carl von Clausewitz? A Guide to the Perpelxed.? United States Naval War College, Summer 1997. Available from: http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/Handel/Handlart.htm (accessed February 28, 2011).Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. ?Lectures on the Philosophy of History.? In Communism, Fascism, and Democracy: The Theoretical Foundations, 2nd edition, edited Carl Cohen, 40-47. New York: Random House, 1972.Howard, Michael. ?The Influence of Clausewitz.? In On War. Edited and Translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 27-44. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.Hughes, Daniel J. Editor. Moltke: On the Art of War ? Selected Writings. Novato, CA: Presidio Press, 1993.Kaiser, David. ?Back to Clausewitz.? Review of Clausewitz?s On War, A Biography by Hew Strachan, Clausewitz and Contemporary War by Antulio J. Echevarria II, and Clausewitz in the Twenty-First Century by Hew Strachan and Andreas Herberg-Rothe. The Journal of Strategic Studies Vol. 32, No. 4 (August 2009) 667-685. http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/ (accessed April 5, 2011).Kant, Immanuel. ?Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals.? In Ethical Philosophy, translated by James W. Ellington, 1-62. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1994.Kaempf, Sebastian. "Violence and Victory: Guerrilla Warfare, 'Authentic Self-Affirmation' and the Overthrow of the Colonial State." Third World Quarterly Vol. 30, No. 1 (February 2009), 129-146. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 4, 2011).Klinger, Janeen. ?The Social Science of Carl von Clausewitz.? Parameters: U.S. Army War College, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Spring 2006), 79-89. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 1, 2011).Liddell Hart, Basil Henry. Strategy. New York: Meridian, 1991.Moody, Peter R. Jr. ?Clausewitz and the Fading Dialectic of War.? World Politics, Vol. 31, No. 3 (April 1979), 417-433. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2009996 (accessed March 5, 2011).Murray, Williamson and Richard Hunt Sinnreich. Past as Prologue: The Importance of History to the Military Profession. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.O?Connell, Robert L. Of Arms and Men: A History of War, Weapons, and Aggression. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.Paret, Peter. ?Clausewitz.? In Makers of Modern Strategy: from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, edited by Peter Paret, 186-213. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.---. Clausewitz and the State: The Man, His Theories, and His Time. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007.---. ?The Genesis of On War.? In On War. Edited and Translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 3-25. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.---. Understanding War: Essays on Clausewitz and the History of Military Power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.Reid, Brian Holden. ?Michael Howard and the Evolution of Modern War Studies.? The Journal of Military History, Vol. 73, No. 3, (July 2009): 869-904. http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/ (accessed March 1, 2011).Roxborough, Ian. ?Clausewitz and the Sociology of War.? The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 45, No. 4 (Dec., 1944) 619-636. http://www.jstor.org/stable/591886 (accessed February 3, 2011)Schuurman, Bart. ?Clausewitz and the ?New Wars? Scholars.? Parameters: U.S. Army War College, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Spring 2010) 89-100. http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/ (accessed February 28, 2011). Strachan, Hew. ?A Clausewitz for Every Season.? The American Interest, Vol. 2, No. 6 (July-August 2007), 29-35.---. Clausewitz?s On War: A Biography. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2007.Sumida, Jon Tetsuro. Decoding Clausewitz: A New Approach to On War. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2008.Summers, Col. Harry G. ?Clausewitz: Eastern and Western Approaches to War? Air University Review, March ?April 1986. http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1986/mar-apr/summers.html (accessed April 4, 2011).Wick, Warner A. Introduction to Ethical Philosophy, translated by James W. Ellington, xi-lxii. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1994.
Nothing quite like the editing and re-writing phase to get the paper down to the acceptable / required page / word limits. What to cut, what to reduce, and what to keep….More head banging...
I read recently that excavations began earlier this year near the “medical school” associated with the infamous Unit 731. Although the Japanese government has never officially acknowledged the atrocities committed by Unit 731, although in recent years a Tokyo court has acknowledged that Unit 731 did exist, and did conducted “germ warfare” in occupied China.Plenty of eyewitness testimony (and confessions from nurses and others) but very little photographic evidence.Anytime that there is a photo display of the aftermath of the Hiroshima or Nagasaki bombings I think that there ought to be concurrent displays of photos from the Japanese occupation of Nanking (1937-38) and of Unit 731.
I think back to when I was in college when there was no internet in the classrooms, no text messaging, nothing to distract you from the lecture at hand aside from immediate things (newspapers, other classmates, etc.). I do not recall ever being "bored to death", even if things being taught were not of the greatest interest to me.
Wow Phid... I can clearly recall certain classes in my undergraduate program 28-29 years ago where I was "bored to death". Sure, there were distractions (co-eds, mainly ;D) - but distractions don't induce boredom. In my mind (and memory) it was boredom that induced finding distractions. I've known several platform instructors who had a delivery not unlike that of Ben Stein's character in Ferris Buehler's Day Off.To be fair, I think that there are boring instructors, boring subjects (depending where the students' interests lie) and disengaged students (who will be disengaged regardless of the instructor or subject).When you think about it, the typical college (or secondary school) class is not that different from when Aristotle taught - now we have blackboards or dry-erase boards rather than drawing in the dirt with a stick (or on a slate) - and some audio-visual is employed, but is the method really all that different? I would say that the current generation of 18-22 year olds have engaged in learning through a different socialization process - and have come more and more to seek seemingly instant information. I think that it might be more accurate to describe them as having a thirst for "information" rather than a thirst for "knowledge." They search for information (and get frustrated when the search engine takes more than 5 - 10 seconds to deliver the search results), review the information, pluck the "nuggets" that they need from the information, use them, and discard the majority of the info. The learning that takes place is in how to find the information, more than in what it means (my opinion, at any rate).
One of my favorites was / is Catherine Drinker Bowen's Lion and the Throne about Sir Edward Coke – More then just a biography, it is very readable and gives excellent insight to the English legal system and government – as well as British colonial machinations in North America in the early 17th century.
I'm using the Howard and Paret translation – buffered primarily by the analysis and critiques of Hew Strachan, Christopher Bassford, and Jon Sumida. Those three take somewhat different approaches, but between the three of them there is a pretty good analysis of interpretation or mis-interpretation of the original German in the Howard and Paret version. For example, Bassford critiques the interpretation that “War is a duel” between two parties to a more appropriate translation would be that “war is a wrestling contest” between two parties – he claims that it is a better fit for the original German and uses the whole “center of gravity” bit to support his illustration – is he right or wrong? I can't say, but his argument makes sense and lends a little better perspective on the use if the term “center of gravity”. Likewise, there is extensive discussion on how to interpret politik – and whether or not it should be consistently interpreted as politics or policy or some other form. Then there is the discussion around interpreting wunderlich – which Howard and Paret interpret as “remarkable” as in Clausewitz's primary “remarkable” trinity — Bassford recommends “miraculous” – suggesting a more “divine” nature of the trinity (Clausewitz sure likes his trinities and grouping things in threes).Of course I'm also reading extensively the supporting essays by Howard, Paret, and Bernard Brodie - as well as W.B. Gallie, Azar Gat, Colin Gray, and a laundry list of others. Then there is the supporting background from Kant, Hegel, and Montesquieu.Even from the very beginning of reading Clausewitz, one needs to remember that he was channeling Scharnhorst much more than he was documenting Napoleon. Unlike Jomini, who saw the majority of his military service as part of an army that rolled from victory to victory, Clausewitz witnessed most of his war experience getting kicked across Europe by Napoleon - right up until the French retreat from Moscow, which was a highly formative experience (along with his captivity in France after Jena.
The birth of “Junk Mail” — or would that be “Junkers Mail”?Pretty cool idea, actually - right up there with Hitler trying to flood the market with counterfeit English Pounds.
There are others, although I'm trying a different tack. Most that I have encountered (written over the last 10 years) are specifically looking to counter either Martin Van Crevald or John Keegan point for point. Back up another 50 years, and the critics are declaring Clausewitz obsolete (absolute war had found its essence in nuclear war) and war could no longer be an extension of policy (or politik). Back up 60 years and Clausewitz was to blame for Hitler and the Nazis. Back up 80 years and the critics were blaming Clausewitz for the carnage of World War I (Liddell Hart). Taken out of the context of the whole, there is validity for each of these arguments – but that's part of the dialectic. I intend to argue that one must always consider the reciprocity and duality of the dialectic – the balance of the opposites – when interpreting Clausewitz. Part of it is remembering that On War was written during a time of Enlightenment. The philosophies of Kant, Hegel, and Montesquieu were prevalent in learned German society, so they no doubt influenced Clausewitz's writings. Not to get too metaphysical, but in absolute war, there is limited war (and in limited war, absolute and escalating violence). In attack, there is defense (and in defense, attack). In Clausewitz's primary “remarkable/miraculous trinity” there is passion, chance, and reason – yet within passion there is reason; within chance and uncertainty there is probability and confidence; and within reason there is irrationality. Basically I'm looking to present an examination of On War from a 30,000 foot view – not to get caught up in individual arguments but to look at the structure of Clausewitz's method of inquiry as a means of understanding what he has left behind in his unfinished works.I'm still refining (of course) but basically any interpretation of Clausewitz that can be neatly fit into a nutshell probably belongs there. Professor Christopher Bassford wrote Clausewitz in English but he certainly didn't write Clausewitz Simplified or Clausewitz for Dummies.
A "respected" journalist
"Respected Journalist" -- Isn't that and oxymoron along the lines of "political honesty" and "journalistic integrity"?
That's a new one on me, although most of my research for World War I has been associated with the causes, the immediate aftermath, and the debate on the causes associated with “the Fischer Controversy”.That being said, Professor Neiberg teaches history at the University of Souther Mississippi and holds a PhD in History from Carnegie Mellon University - surely he provided some sources to back his claim?Depending on the sources he lists in his book, it might be interesting to reach out to him and seek additional perspective / supporting arguments. His USM facutly page (http://www.usm.edu/history/neiberg.php) lists his contact info, to include his email: neiberg102@gmail.com
The AMU library is located in, of all places, Charles Town, WV (a stone's throw from Harpers Ferry).The library offers access to JSTOR articles, Lexis-Nexis, ProQuest, Ebsco, Footnote.com, ABC-Clio World at War, CRC netbase, Elsevier, Loislaw, Poiesis, CIAO, Jane's, Praeger, and a bunch of other article databases I've never used. There is also a database for "American History in Video" that lists some 1500 videos from the 1890s to 1980s (I've never used it)eBook catalogs include: ACLS Humanities, ACLS History, Ebrary, Netlibrary, CIAO, Praeger, and ProQuest Dissertations. In addition to standard ILL they also have an ebook rental program (at no cost to students) and an Online Book Catalog (for the actual books in their traditional libarary).They also list contact info for 15 research librarians.The web resources listed in the History department portal give links and access to a variety of libraries and sources - some free, others through library cooperative agreements(The Avalon Project at Yale, Cornell Univeristy Library collection of Historical Monographs, the Eurodocs collection at BYU, University of Calgary library's digital collection on the Middle Ages, ibibio, World War I document archive at BYU, the Vincent Voice Library at MSU (oral history collection), Center for Military History -- the list goes on and on. THere is more there than most folks will ever even be aware of.I've been in the "ebrary" for the last two hours reading Christopher Bassford's Clausewitz in English Ebrary allows me to highlight text and export those highlights, and any free-form notes to MS Word. Has it's plusses and minuses, but the only copy of the book I need is never checked out.
How exactly did they expect students to access books in library at AMU? I guess I never thought of that before.
I too buy a lot of books, and have found that the netlibrary and elibrary e-books aren't as bad as I thought they would be - I guess they've kind of grown on me. ;DI also make use of my local (public) research library.I'm sure that being overseas has some challenges, but I make extensive use of AMU's Inter-Library Loan (ILL) system. I currently have six books checked out (two from the actual AMU library and four from other schools). Over the last three courses I've probably received close to two dozen books through AMU's ILL or direct loan from the AMU library. Generally, within 24 hours of filling out the ILL form I will get an email stating that the request has been filled and the book shows up via UPS in two or three days. Generally, the book will be on loan for 30 days. Sometimes we can renew, sometimes we cannot.Just as an interesting aside, I took this afternoon off from work since I have a major paper coming due in a couple of weeks and I am currently sitting IN the AMU / APUS library (taking a quick break from researching by accessing WCF! - and this course is my justification/excuse for why I've been so absent from the forums over the last couple of months) While it may pale in comparison to most college libraries, the history / military history collection is quite significant (with more coming). There are some advantages to living within 25 miles of AMU's headquarters!
