Sun Tzu - The Art of War

[driftder]

Sun Tzu's principals are very basic though relating them to modern warfare is a bit tricky as the language wasn't as developed back then and he didn't plan us to be reading his writings either way. It really is a good read if you're bored or if you're waiting in the car. xP

bored or waiting in a car? amazing... Btw which part of it gives the clue that the language was not as developed? And which ways should we be reading his writings? I'm all ears.

 

[Berserk Fury]

Applicable in every respect, not just psychological alone. As for my comment, its just to point out that you are missing a big part of the gist when you read a translation. That's where most non-Chinese who read Sun-tzu get side tracked. That's why I suggest a more in-depth reading along with a understanding of the Chinese culture and psyche especially on the first chapter - which the main gist is don't go to war if you can help it but if you must, then make plans not to lose. Note the phrase is "not to lose".

Anyway what I am saying is not meant to be combative, just a observation that most non-Chinese who read Sun-tzu get side tracked. Case is point - ever tried Omar Khayyam in its pure unadulterated form? Thats what I am trying to get at.

I am Chinese so if anybody can understand Sun Tzu better... It'd probably be me unless there's another Chinese person or even asian person here.

Btw which part of it gives the clue that the language was not as developed?

That's not a valid question. I meant that Chinese is more developed than English any day and that the Chinese language wasn't as developed as the Chinese language is now.

And which ways should we be reading his writings?

Preferrably get a translation by someone who's actually chinese and has experience in translating ancient text. You should read it carefully; that all I can say. :

 

[Darko Ribnikar]

Sun Tzu is fine ss long as you don’t forget Carl von Clausewitz.

 

[Berserk Fury]

Clausewitz is pretty good though I still like Sun Tzu a little better though it might just be personal preference or a cultural thing.

 

[driftder]

I am Chinese so if anybody can understand Sun Tzu better... It'd probably be me unless there's another Chinese person or even asian person here.

Being Chinese qualifies you to understand Sun-tze? Guess you need to inform Roger Ames, John Minford and the other non-Chinese who translated and wrote their texts and theses on Sun-tze. And FYI, no you are definitely not the only Chinese here .

That's not a valid question. I meant that Chinese is more developed than English any day and that the Chinese language wasn't as developed as the Chinese language is now.

And you are not giving a coherent, sensible and valid reply to my question, so stick to the facts. And what the heck do you mean by "Chinese is more developed than English any day"? Are you trying to start a flame war here?

Preferrably get a translation by someone who's actually chinese and has experience in translating ancient text. You should read it carefully; that all I can say. :

And who might that recommended "someone who's actually chinese and has experience in translating ancient text" be - you? To paraphrase Charlie Brown - good grief :coffee

 

[Berserk Fury]

And you are not giving a coherent, sensible and valid reply to my question, so stick to the facts. And what the heck do you mean by "Chinese is more developed than English any day"? Are you trying to start a flame war here?

No I'm not trying to start a flame war.
Chinese is pictographic writing which means it can convey more ideas than English which is based on sounds etc. That's why translations from Chinese to English and vice versa are hard. Plus, Chinese has more idioms etc.
English is relatively simple to writing chinese as you can sound out your syllables while in Chinese the writing is in the form of miniature pictures.

And who might that recommended "someone who's actually chinese and has experience in translating ancient text" be - you? To paraphrase Charlie Brown - good grief

lol, I never said it'd be me. Actually, I know a few professors in Beijing who specialize in ancient text and have written good translations of the text.:kar :

 

[KGB]

Is there any evidence that Clausewitz was influenced by sun tzu? Is it moe than coincidence that both sun tzu and the soviets emphasized the role of politics in war? If I remember right sun tzu said that war is a continuation of politics and the soviets said that war must have a political goal in mind. Please forgive the very rough paraphrasing.

 

[Berserk Fury]

In my opinion, Clausewitz was influenced by Sun Tzu's writings. Clausewitz just expanded and modernized Sun Tzu's writings to make them more applicable. Of course, he did add his own opinions into his writings.

 

[Maverickjag]

Sun Tzu just gives us a basis, we have to expand upon it and create our own tactics, but he still tells us what principles to base our strategies around. I'd give it a yes, there's a reason why it's still read in Army ROTC...

 

[driftder]

Sun Tzu just gives us a basis, we have to expand upon it and create our own tactics, but he still tells us what principles to base our strategies around. I'd give it a yes, there's a reason why it's still read in Army ROTC...

thought its the jarheads who made it a requirement as bed time reading :. rotc huh? which class of and where? met a few from carolina once.

 

[Maverickjag]

thought its the jarheads who made it a requirement as bed time reading :. rotc huh? which class of and where? met a few from carolina once.

I'm not quite there yet, my dad went. I'm goin in a year or two. Hopefully be stationed in Tennessee, maybe go to Martin... Not sure yet just planning on goin.

 

[driftder]

I'm not quite there yet, my dad went. I'm goin in a year or two. Hopefully be stationed in Tennessee, maybe go to Martin... Not sure yet just planning on goin.

luck then. hear that you can choose your station and specialty after rotc. try not to get a cushy remf assignment :

heck why not join the jarheads? can jump from rifles to being a airedale (any jarheads around can ignore this statement).

 

[dioditto]

Well he did go on a limb sort of by stating that if you trust your conduct of warfare to any mention of luck or if you did not plan properly ie fighting in snow country without any warm clothing or being too rigid etc, you deserve to have your butt kick and your head handed to you on a platter .

As observed in Napoleon and Hitler's invasion of Russia

 

[driftder]

As observed by Napoleon and Hitler's invasion of Russia

ahem...I believe those 2 gents did not take the time to read Sun-tzu's classic. They are too full of themselves then hehe. I think Clausewitz came out arnd Napoleon's time right?

 

[crazypole]

Clauswitz was around during the Napoleonic era, but his works were not published until later, i think maybe around the 1840's (the date is a guess).

 

[spk]

good resource

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/awc-thry.htm#gen

 

[wassss]

zulqarnain,

Warfare above all is human behavior. Human behavior will not change no matter how much technology advances. So old strategies which rely and decipher human behavior will be still valid in some form or other.

i agree with you,although the technology can develop very quickly ,the basic strategies won't change too much,in chinese we call that万变不离其宗

 

[Strategos]

In my opinion, Clausewitz was influenced by Sun Tzu's writings. Clausewitz just expanded and modernized Sun Tzu's writings to make them more applicable. Of course, he did add his own opinions into his writings.

I hate to inform you,but they stessed oposite sides of warfare,Clausewitz recomended a pitched battle, not retreating (Lol),and favoured pincer strikes,Sun Tzu was the exact opposite, indeed he felt that a fight only broke out when a war party(or whatever)failed to acheive its goal through manauvere

 

[Lanz0r]

The only downside is that it is not a how to guide, but merely a text presenting snipits of strategy.

I've seen a "how to" version of the book, with all these drawing telling you how to move your men if the enemy does this in this scenario ect. Spent about 45mins kneeling on a book-store floor reading it.

 

[Analyst]

I personnally think Sun Tzu is a classic...heck, it's a materpeice. Unlike Machiaveli or Clausewitz, this text is still very relevent. It focusses on strategic perspective and analysis that are common to any conflict analysis. Furthermore, the text is much more focussed on attaining your objectives WITHOUT actually initiating combat : espionnage, sabotage, bribery, tradecraft and indirect warfare. Personnaly, I always tough that direct military confrontation is to be used only as a last resort. Military conflict is a waste of precious ressources (including $$$, human lives and diplomatic ressources) and should not be considered an end by itself. Indeed, it should be avoided up until the point where diplomacy and indirect warfare fail.

I think the analytical framework and paradigms presented in the book are still relevant today, even tough most armies don't fight with archers or pikemen anymore!