Viewing this for the first time, Mearsheimer sent me. Ukraine war on high Day 33, Mr. Stoker's casual comments seem very insightful. Too bad no one else seems to be listening back then, especially Mr. Putin.
“There are 3 truths . Personal truth , social truth and universal truth ..... these may operate independent or interdependent of each other but none of these examples are consistent and they all fade away through time “ .- R .Wagner , stay zen . Machiavelli also wrote an Art of War just an FYI for everyone exploring human matters . Great info . Thank you for the upload . Awesome delivery.
My favorite Clausewitz quote is one almost completely ignored, in Book 3, Chapter 1, from his review of Frederick the Great's 1760 campaign: “To bring Silesia into the safe harbor of a well- guaranteed peace was his object.” I'm a late-20th-Century child raised on tales of my father's and grandfather's wars. This remark about limited, defined war objectives coming from a German general was a slip-on-the-ice double-take. I would read elsewhere about Frederick the Great and saw how he himself was no Napoleon, no run-amok egotist. But Clausewitz's remark stayed with me for a reason I couldn't fathom for sometime longer until I realized that it applied to American history as well. Yes, American expansionism and "Manifest Destiny" left plenty of room for Napoleonic egos to do what they do best. Yes, Lincoln's Civil War policy of destroying the Confederacy was the template for FDR's WW2 policy of destroying the Axis. No; the case I have in mind is Polk. His object was to establish borders with his neighbors, all the while continuing the US push westward. What he got from British Canada by negotiation he got from Mexico by war.
Mine is "like commerce, it cannot be classified as an art or science but can only lied in between". Listening to economists and the political squabbles today, many people seem to think that only their ideas of the economy are scientific in the natural sense, forgotting that society changes its rules all the time.
TJ I'm not quite sure what your point is but I think it was more complex in Texas where I live. THERE were very few people that would be called Mexican or even Spanish when it was New Spain which existed for over two centuries and as Mexico it existed for 12 years. mo3st people were Anglos out of the South who came there-- some with slaves-- as even though it's really the West geographically it has some things in common with the South and considers itself Southern by virtue of the demography of the original peoples. Regarding San Francisco-- many Mexicans left their country of origin to go up into that part of California because there was NOT the same prejudice against their indigenous bloodline as there was in the Spanish controlled Mexico or New Spain. MY point being that you have many things to consider and I think I've given you two which actually both refer to demography which seems to be ignored by you and others to your detriment
I think maybe the most interesting comparison between Clausewitz and Sun Tzu comes at the time when the second highlights the better victory comes when no fighting or blood shed exists at all, while Clausewitz says that the "main battle and the destruction of the enemy's army is the quintessential part of war. Napoleon couldn't afford Ulm victory fearing blood shed".
Reading, "On War," for the second time. First time I was 25 now I'm trying again at age 38. Informational yet a hard read. Perhaps if I experienced war it would be more understandable.
Host here. You have to realize there are 10 of these a week, or more. No one can go to everything. Also, people can watch from their office, and it's impossible to get a count of them (I tried)
You were right the first time: the Germans were successful in the Franco- Prussian war, as Prussia was one combatant on the German side (the North German Confederation), but you know that..
Good lord. How can someone who is a military historian not know the difference between cavalry and Calvary? Or is he actually talking about the crucifixion?
I found this lecture wandered and relied too heavily on the slides, which weren't explained very well and were difficult to read. A clearer, more direct lecture on Clausewitz can be found here: th-cam.com/video/pSF_UtEWnCg/w-d-xo.html
I really wanted to watch that lecture, but I'm afraid the 240p is going to send me into cardiac arrest. However, I quite enjoyed this lecture, but I completely see your point.
I would ask what you would say about prohibition against drugs wars with opium and cocaine etc. I would say the prohibition has failed totally by militarising our police forces thus draining other areas of fighting basic crimes! It's not working for mexico, columbia, usa, afghanistan, britain, europe etc etc.
Well being a theorist is one thing have always been fascinated by the fact if the theory actually works we all should be speaking German. Such is not the case.
ONE NEEDS TO BE CAREFUL NOT LET THESE MEN SUCH AS CLAUSEWITZ TO KEEP ONE IN A BOX. TRY ALWAYS TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX. THIS IS WHAT WINS WARS. ALEXANDER THE GREAT, NAPOLEAN AND HANNIBAL HAD NO CLAUSEWITZ.
Viewing this for the first time, Mearsheimer sent me. Ukraine war on high Day 33, Mr. Stoker's casual comments seem very insightful. Too bad no one else seems to be listening back then, especially Mr. Putin.
What remarks did he make on Ukraine?
The later part of the Q&A aged like fine wine;)
very interesting lecture of Clausewitz, both the man as a soldier and as a military theorist, thank you for this fine posting
Your joking? This guys rudderless.
Hearing a professor consistently say, “Calvary” in lieu of cavalry is really jarring.
“There are 3 truths . Personal truth , social truth and universal truth ..... these may operate independent or interdependent of each other but none of these examples are consistent and they all fade away through time “ .- R .Wagner , stay zen . Machiavelli also wrote an Art of War just an FYI for everyone exploring human matters . Great info . Thank you for the upload . Awesome delivery.
Watching this in 2024 is mind-blowing
My favorite Clausewitz quote is one almost completely ignored, in Book 3, Chapter 1, from his review of Frederick the Great's 1760 campaign:
“To bring Silesia into the safe harbor of a well- guaranteed peace was his object.”
I'm a late-20th-Century child raised on tales of my father's and grandfather's wars. This remark about limited, defined war objectives coming from a German general was a slip-on-the-ice double-take.
I would read elsewhere about Frederick the Great and saw how he himself was no Napoleon, no run-amok egotist. But Clausewitz's remark stayed with me for a reason I couldn't fathom for sometime longer until I realized that it applied to American history as well.
Yes, American expansionism and "Manifest Destiny" left plenty of room for Napoleonic egos to do what they do best. Yes, Lincoln's Civil War policy of destroying the Confederacy was the template for FDR's WW2 policy of destroying the Axis.
No; the case I have in mind is Polk. His object was to establish borders with his neighbors, all the while continuing the US push westward. What he got from British Canada by negotiation he got from Mexico by war.
mine is "Strategy is an economy of power."
Mine is "like commerce, it cannot be classified as an art or science but can only lied in between". Listening to economists and the political squabbles today, many people seem to think that only their ideas of the economy are scientific in the natural sense, forgotting that society changes its rules all the time.
TJ I'm not quite sure what your point is but I think it was more complex in Texas where I live. THERE were very few people that would be called Mexican or even Spanish when it was New Spain which existed for over two centuries and as Mexico it existed for 12 years. mo3st people were Anglos out of the South who came there-- some with slaves-- as even though it's really the West geographically it has some things in common with the South and considers itself Southern by virtue of the demography of the original peoples. Regarding San Francisco-- many Mexicans left their country of origin to go up into that part of California because there was NOT the same prejudice against their indigenous bloodline as there was in the Spanish controlled Mexico or New Spain.
MY point being that you have many things to consider and I think I've given you two which actually both refer to demography which seems to be ignored by you and others to your detriment
I think maybe the most interesting comparison between Clausewitz and Sun Tzu comes at the time when the second highlights the better victory comes when no fighting or blood shed exists at all, while Clausewitz says that the "main battle and the destruction of the enemy's army is the quintessential part of war. Napoleon couldn't afford Ulm victory fearing blood shed".
I've read On War but didn't know much about his military career so this was interesting.
thanks for uploading the lecture on clausewitz, i wanted to get a decent background of him before reading "on war"
Never heard about Clausewitz before playing the PC-Game Europa Universalis (based on the Clausewitz-engine). That's why I'm here.
Reading, "On War," for the second time. First time I was 25 now I'm trying again at age 38. Informational yet a hard read. Perhaps if I experienced war it would be more understandable.
You experience war , to a certain extent , just trying to “ succeed in your everyday life .
@@rachelspanties5400That's true, as I'm reading this book again I'm beginning to take notes and use it in everyday life.
Very nice ,👍
Hamburg was not in Mecklinburg any more than Cleveland is in Pennsylvania. it is located n the Elbe, many miles west of westernmost Mecklenburg.
Not a lot of comments here, so I'll just add mine.
Misread this as Clausewitz, his Life and Ewoks. Clicked. Now I want that video.
Google staff not appreciating this talk, not so many people turned up!
Host here. You have to realize there are 10 of these a week, or more. No one can go to everything.
Also, people can watch from their office, and it's impossible to get a count of them (I tried)
You were right the first time: the Germans were successful in the Franco-
Prussian war, as Prussia was one combatant on the German side (the North German Confederation), but you know that..
Too bad that the audience didn't ask very many relevant questions...
Methinks I heard a C.S. Lewis quote!
FFS Surely this guy should know the difference between Calvary and cavalry.
I guess he chose not to read el bible
Good lord. How can someone who is a military historian not know the difference between cavalry and Calvary? Or is he actually talking about the crucifixion?
I’m trying to pc it together through the lens of your latter statement ...... it’s fun
I found this lecture wandered and relied too heavily on the slides, which weren't explained very well and were difficult to read. A clearer, more direct lecture on Clausewitz can be found here: th-cam.com/video/pSF_UtEWnCg/w-d-xo.html
I really wanted to watch that lecture, but I'm afraid the 240p is going to send me into cardiac arrest. However, I quite enjoyed this lecture, but I completely see your point.
Then make your own motherf****r
I would ask what you would say about prohibition against drugs wars with opium and cocaine etc. I would say the prohibition has failed totally by militarising our police forces thus draining other areas of fighting basic crimes! It's not working for mexico, columbia, usa, afghanistan, britain, europe etc etc.
show more the presentation and less the lecturer
No
and the homelessness 💩💀💀☠️🥶😎🥶🥶🥺⚰️⚰️👺🪦🪦🪦🤢🤢⚰️👺👺💩💩💩💩💩
Well being a theorist is one thing have always been fascinated by the fact if the theory actually works we all should be speaking German. Such is not the case.
ONE NEEDS TO BE CAREFUL NOT LET THESE MEN SUCH AS CLAUSEWITZ TO KEEP ONE IN A BOX. TRY ALWAYS TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX. THIS IS WHAT WINS WARS. ALEXANDER THE GREAT, NAPOLEAN AND HANNIBAL HAD NO CLAUSEWITZ.
Damn you're dumb
HE NEVER STATES WHY HE IS SAYING ALL THIS! WHY WONT GOOGLE GIVE THEIR STAGE TO ARTISTS POETS ARCHITECTS AND FLAMENCO GUITARISTS?
The speaker is a typical government employee: Lazy and incompetent research.