Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 26th, 2012, 08:33 AM   #791
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: United States.
Posts: 312
Blog Entries: 1
Wink


Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
Nope, that's the aim of war. And the essence of it is blood, because this aim achives via shedding the blood. It's like in football, the essence of it is scoring, the aim to make more scores than your opponet and you will never win the game if you haven't scored at least one time. So you can't win the war i.e. achive its main aim without following of its essence.
To score a goal the player is not obligated to have a bloody nose. Although English soccer may be an exception
Bloodandsteel is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 26th, 2012, 08:36 AM   #792
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: United States.
Posts: 312
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloc View Post
Of course that's an ideal victory, but when do such victories occur? That's one distinction between Western thinkers on war and Eastern ones.
Singapore.
Bloodandsteel is offline  
Old January 26th, 2012, 08:37 AM   #793

Belloc's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: USA
Posts: 5,418

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodandsteel View Post
Singapore.
Well they certainly bluffed their way through that one certainly, but they did had to defeat the British army enough to convince them it was fruitless to resist.
Belloc is offline  
Old January 26th, 2012, 08:40 AM   #794
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: United States.
Posts: 312
Blog Entries: 1

  • For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
  • Ch. 3
  • Variant translations
  • Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
  • The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there are any actual hostilities... It is best to win without fighting.
Sun Tzu Wiki.
Bloodandsteel is offline  
Old January 26th, 2012, 08:41 AM   #795

Belloc's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: USA
Posts: 5,418

Yes I'm well aware of Sun Tzu's writings. I prefer Clausewitz though.
Belloc is offline  
Old January 29th, 2012, 03:07 AM   #796
Citizen
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Helios View Post
Soviet Union did the most.
Ditto.

No disrespect to the other allied forces, but IMO, the Soviets bore the brunt of the European conflict, and I don't think any other nation could have withstood the casualties they endured.
TFMosby is offline  
Old January 29th, 2012, 05:12 AM   #797

Earl_of_Rochester's Avatar
Scoundrel
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Perambulating in St James' Park
Posts: 13,376

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
Who btw also had an agreement with the Nazis, so USSR occupied allies of its ally? xD

German–Latvian Non-Aggression Pact: German

German–Estonian Non-Aggression Pact: German

Btw you would be surprised but the same pact also had Poland!

German


Not to mention about Munich Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In other words

Click the image to open in full size.

Who made this ridiculous cartoon?

Bearing in mind, of course, that in 1939 a Communist was about as delightful as Nazi for most Western Europeans.


Click the image to open in full size.

Not sure if I should have started this in another thread as this one appears to have gone slightly OT.
Earl_of_Rochester is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
win, ww2



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.