Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Military theory essay
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Whether they are mistakes, achievements, or anything in between, events from the past teach individuals and groups of people invaluable lessons. The problem is that people cannot experience themselves all these events; neither can they learn about them all. So they rely on analysis, conceptualizations, etcetera, which beyond historical collection of facts, constitute what are called theories. The wisdom that George Santayana captured in his famous quote, and that he stated with respect to human learning process, makes perfect sense in military matters.
Military theory is an evolving set of fundamental thoughts, ideas, principles and rules, that are related to military matters, such as soldiers, armed forces, weapons, war or peace, and that military leaders have to study all along their careers in order to analyze, understand, explain and eventually address the challenges they face. So as to establish this thesis, it is first necessary to consider and define both terms military and theory, individually and together, and to determine the dominant trends of thoughts in military theory. Second, it is required to explain how the purpose of military theory equals its utility, and why it is mandatory for soldiers to study military theory all along their careers. Finally, it is crucial to understand that military theory is the basis of any military doctrine, strategy, operational art, and subsequently of any military action across the range of military operation.
A theory can be defined as systematically developed assumptions, principles, and rules devised to analyze, predict or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena. People have always s...
... middle of paper ...
... War. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret. New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1989. He explains it in the first four paragraphs of his preface, p. 61.
Julian Corbett. Principles of Maritime Strategy. Minneola, NY, Dover, 2004.
Giulio Douhet. The Command of the Air. Edited by Joseph Patrick Harahan and Richard H. Kohn. Tuscaloosa, AL, The University of Alabama Press, 2009.
Robert M. Citino. Blitzkrieg to Desert Storm: The Evolution of Operational Warfare. Lawrence, KS, University Press of Kansas, 2004.
David Galula. Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice. Praeger Publishers, 2006.
Fred Iklé. Every War Must End. New York: Columbia, 2005.
WS 524 L, Main Point 1.
WS 500 L, slide 5
WS 500 L, slide 6
WS 500 L, slide 7
JP1, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp1.pdf, p. 43
Ibid, chapter 1
WS 500 L, slide 1
The Art of War. Translated by Samuel B. Griffith. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963. Von Clausewitz, Carl. A. Translated and edited by Sir Michael Howard and Peter Paret.
during the war. This novel is able to portray the overwhelming effects and power war has
YORK, LORRAINE. "Wars, The (1977)." Oxford Companion To Canadian Literature (1997): 1168. Literary Reference Center. Web. 9 Apr. 2014.
Airpower inevitably changed the characteristics and the environment for outcome of wars. Theorists contend that war results from drastic changes in the international security environment, diplomacy, domestic politics, ideology, economics, and revolutionary advances in technology. Clausewitz emphasized, “Each period would have hold to its own theory”. Douhet wrote, "Victory smiles upon those who anticipate the changes in the character of war, not upon those who wait to adapt themselves after the changes occur." Airpower technology changed everything. Airpower can exploit speed, range, and flexibility better than land and sea forces. War may be the realm of chance, as Clausewitz advises but victory or defeat are not recorded as random outcomes. “There is an approach to war that maximizes the prospect of the achievement of decisive victory (whatever outcome one decides is sufficiently decisive and adequately victorious).” As warfare expands to new domains, it must continue to look back at military theory to develop effective
There are many definitions to theory. According to Akers (2009) “theories are tentative answers to the commonly asked questions about events and behavior” (Akers, (2009, p. 1). Theory is a set of interconnect statements that explain how two or more things are related in two casual fashions, based upon a confirmed hypotheses and established multiple times by disconnected groups of researchers.
More than two thousand years ago, a Chinese strategist known as Sun Tzu wrote one of the enduring classics of military theory. Most likely written during a period of Chinese history referred to as the ‘Warring States’ period, Sun Tzu’s The Art of War has continued to be studied by military strategists for millennia. Even today, The Art of War is required reading for Naval Officer Candidates. At nearly the same time in the fourth century B.C., the Greek city-states were facing invasion from the mighty Persian army. Vastly outnumbered, the Greeks eventually triumphed by defeating their enemies at Plataea, but not before fighting one of history’s greatest military stands at Thermopylae. By using Sun Tzu’s classic text to analyze the battles of Thermopylae and Plataea, it is possible to gain a better understanding not only of the battles themselves, but also of the reasons why The Art of War has remained such an influential and respected text over the centuries.
Individuals create and at times state theories that explain events and circumstances. The term theory is used in daily language when people attempt to make connections to understand an event or influence another’s understanding of the reason or justification for a circumstance (Merriam-Webster 's collegiate dictionary, 2016). However, there is more to the term theory. Defining theory has been the subject of great inquiry across various disciplines. If a small group of academic researchers were asked to define theory each person would have submit a different definition, yet the core concept of what theory is would be consistent.
One of the significant lessons on warfare and leadership put forth by Sun Tzu was having the ability to act in dynamic opposites as a tactical advantage when planning an attack. He had stated that “All warfare is based on deception” (Giles). If one’s own army is strong, one must command his soldiers to appear weak. It was of significant importance to create an illusion or a false image, like how soldiers would act weary or injured for the enemy to believe they hav...
Another famous advice from the treatise is that one of the best war strategies is subduing the enemy while they are still unprepared. In addition, militants are advised to work speedily instead of having to prolong their campaigns. They are also advised to have a prior knowledge of the enemy and to have a personal knowledge of themselves since ...
The ancient military treatises of Sun Tzu, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Carl von Clausewitz are all too often looked upon by readers as texts that are not applicable to modern-day warfare. The fact that these treatises were published centuries ago—Sun Tzu’s The Art of War in roughly 500 B.C., Machiavelli’s The Art of War in 1521, and Clausewitz’s Principles of War in the early nineteenth century—only furthers the belief that these treatises were designed for ancient warfare and thus have no current day applicability. A thorough examination of current events, however, suggests that the tactics within these ancient treatises are still applicable to warfare. In fact, current day events—events ranging from the Civil War in Syria to the Russian-American
As situations in the 21st Century features military operations largely being influenced by political decisions, the military sector should act more independently from their civilian counterparts. Since not many social and political elites are associated with military figures anymore, there is less chances for the politicians to understand matters of the military. It is military personnel that best understand what is happening in this country in terms of military related. Although the very own nature of National Security also heavily depends on political decisions, the growing civilian influence on military may not be as effective as if military had more control and power over its own
“I believe that operational-level commanders must first master the basic philosophy and principles of warfare. Only then can they make current or new technologies their servant.” Since 1947, airpower theory had the greatest impact on the employment of American airpower, because the promise of strategic bombing would deliver decisive effects and achieve a swift victory continued throughout the wars in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. Although strategies, doctrines and technology changed over time, the application of US airpower revealed the dependence on the traditional air power theory in the second half of the twentieth century. In the first part, this paper will present the main prophecies and predictions of two of the most relevant airpower theorists.
Tactics are essential to the military’s success because they allow troops to secure the upper hand at war or in battle and allow the enemy to be absolved. The military is used to defend against enemies and tactics make this possible by allowing proper planning, coordination, and general maneuvering of military operations to
The military force goes to war to protect the state security and national interests to achieve national policy. During military operation such as war or peacetime, the politicians command the military leaders to win the war(Alexndra-). The military leaders conduct or command the military force in the battlefield. In the battlefield is the actually fighting of the two military forces using all the combatant. The military commander is not given national policy but both the politicians and the military realm work together to achieve national policy. Strategy can be affected by failure of military force in the battlefield.(-22) .The military force s...
Instead they study “the rest of military history – that is fascination with the recruitment, training, and socialization of personnel, combat motivation, and the effects of service and war on the individual soldier, etc.” They take ideas and methodologies from the other sciences: “sociology, anthropology, economics, psychology and literature.” The issue I have with military history is their politics (bias) that is coming into play, which should not be part of military history. Bourke references Benjamin Cooling on his analysis of traditional military history: “admitted that the older type of military history ‘connotes traditional drum and trumpet operational history with heroic, often panegyric coverage of the past’. In contrast, new military history ‘may represent the liberal wing, while the drum and trumpet school upholds the conservative right of the line.” Keeping with the liberal way of thinking she adds: “The inner world of combatants remains at the heart of new military history, spawning a vast amount of research. There was a shift in emphasis from passive suffering to active killing. Humanity’s extraordinary gift for slaying each other was veiled in much traditional military history. Bourke goes on to add in her book “An Intimate History of Killing”: “The characteristic act distinctive of men at war is not dying, it is killing. For politicians, military strategists, and many historians, war may be about the conquest of territory or the struggle to recover a sense of national honour (sic) but, for the man on active service, warfare is concerned with the lawful killing of other people.