Ancient war strategist speaks. (g)
I read SunTzu, SunTzu was my teacher, and ST, you are no SunTzu (g) [sorry, that's a joke]
When I said the old SunTzu was a pacifist, I meant his writings in the Art of War itself shows him to be a pacifist -- he advocates capturing enemy forces intact without a loss of life and leaving enemy countries whole and intact, I did not even have to consider the mythology behind the Taoism, and I consider the stories of meeting LaoTzu to be a fable, not historical fact.
I think we agree that WOT and Iraq are not cakewalks, but the fundamental problem is the US entered the GWOT (I prefer war on islamic jihadis) at a disadvantage, the other side had a large headstart.
The Art of War is a valuable compass for many things. I would consider the tactics currently employed in Iraq and perhaps the strategy itself to be at odds with many tennets of Art of War. But what war in history has been executed perfectly? What is hard for many people (other than learned men like you) to grasp is that as ugly as Iraq is, if you compare this with any real war in history, by most metrics, Iraqi war is still exemplary. That people expect perfection is a problem when no war ever been perfect.
According to SunTzu folklore, even the actual execution of each battle SunTzu fought did not always match his perfect option. In many cases his armies suffered heavy casualties and did not leave his enemies forces 'intact'. Hence AoW is really talking about guidelines to the best option, but that best option may not be always available. |
