"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it." - Sun Tzu
When Hu Jintao visited "W" three years ago, he handed him this sixth century (b.c.) book by Sun Tzu called The Art of War, a referendum on his past mistakes. Since this self-proclaimed cowboy did not need a lesson on how to wage a war and fuck it up, there's much to be said about where we would be now had he read that book and taken a few lessons from it before he went wild-wild-west. Then again, hindsight is 20/20 and there's no need to cry over spilled red blood from the thousands of troops that have died in vain.
JFK quoted from this book more than once and prevented a nuclear holocaust. Ho Chi Minh swore by it and overthrew two Western powers by translating it to Vietnamese for his men (Yeah, I said it). It's so highly recommended -- sometimes mandatory -- military officers in the US armed services must study it before they are commissioned. A lot of CEO's use to outwit their competitors. So how can a book this old still have such a profound impact on how we deal with our foes strategically and diplomatically?
I keep hearing this quote from our elected leaders: "Our best days are ahead of us."
Is that really true?
I think we've had too many Presidents that have taken this country so far back diplomatically with their policies, they've driven us into a ditch. What's so great about Ronald Reagan? I mean, what did he really do besides tell Mr. Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall? We forget that he was the man that aided and abedded Saddam Hussein before we attacked him. The man that has grown this American military killing machine so big it couldn't stand on its own two feet. And "W" himself trying to be the Reagan there never was, it was a sore sight to see.
If you listen or watch the news regularly like I do, notice how America does not have the capacity to do what it does best (invade and destroy other countries) without the consent of China. What to do with North Korea and Lil Kim? Must consult China. What to do with Iran and Ahmedinejad? Must consult China. Although not many respectable journalists will outright admit that the US of A is quickly losing its economic prowess to this "communist" nation, China has done nothing but sit back and watch A-ME-LI-KA act a fool as she continues to borrow money she can't pay back while shooting herself in foot.
When I think of this book, I think about Vietnam, The Bay of Pigs, The Iran-Iraq War, The Soviet-Afghan War, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. I think about superpowers trying to have their way with smaller, sovereign nations. I think about gross miscalculations and a house-of-cards argument for long term occupation. At the end of the day, you judge this text by the merit of its longevity. There's a reason why it's survived over 2,500 years. The moral of the story: Wars must be avoided at all costs.
Posts
16 COMMENTS:
Have you read "Culture and Carnage" by Victor Hanson? It's about how the West is supposedly superior in war. I told my (white) friend about the book, and he said, "Is that guy kidding? The Art of War is required reading at Navy!"
(I agreed with him. The book is kinda racist and logically, um, not all there...)
EXCELLENT point MM.
Most Americans have totally missed that China is now the predominant world poer.
Too many years of reminiscing about WWII and the grand deeds of yesteryear and not enough time staying #1.
How absurd it was during the decades when america could have turned this things around (the 60's, 70's and 80's --the situation was too far gone by the 90's!) that instead of dealing with corporate waste, lack of competitiveness, even limited --I said "LIMITED!"-- protectionism, instead the U.S. allowed the same corporate bastards who demanded subsidies (taxpayer money) for themselves and lower wages for those same taxpayers, decided to blame everyone else (welfare mothers, government regulations, competition from Japan Inc.) and in the process wasted years we couldn't afford to lose.
The moral of the story is, the masses better learn to look out for their own best interests instead of creating a culture of worshipping the people who are selling them out!
Let's get real here. America doesn't truly consult anyone on its wars, including China.
The USA may make a show of "multilateralism," but it is multilateralism on America's terms, or not at all.
"My Way or the Highway" is the USA's modus operandi in reality.
One only has to remember the run-up to the US aggression against Iraq in 2003.
After failing to get a UN resolution to justify this war, the USA defied global public opinion as well as the opposition of China, Russia and even allies like France--and still attacked Iraq anyway.
And regarding North Korea and Iran, the USA is attempting to strong arm ... I mean ... diplomatically convince China (and Russia) to tacitly acquiesce in the USA's geopolitical pressure/threats towards these countries.
The irony is that North Korea, Iran, and Iraq are merely geopolitical *stepping stones* towards what America really wants: Control over Eurasia (especially Russia and China).
In other words, America is effectively demanding that China and Russia allow the USA to have its way with these so-called "Axis of Evil" nations ... in order to better threaten Russia and China themselves down the line!
Ultimately, America is invading and destroying other countries because it seeks global dominance--which will maintain US economic supremacy and the oh so precious American way of life.
In fact, the American military even has a name for this broader US doctrine: Full Spectrum Dominance.
"Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order" http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14046
Worse yet, most "antiwar" opposition in America is at best self-serving. By and large, Americans complain about US wars because it is costing their country too much in money or dead soldiers.
The fact of American aggression or the millions of people that the USA is guilty of murdering in its wars, however?
These issues barely elicit a yawn from the Land of the Free.
Such is the behavior of the American Empire and its citizens.
Ooh. I didn't know that. I should read it before I go to OCS (hurray Ft. Bragg/Ft. Sill!) in two years.
I would consider myself somewhat an amateur expert on this topic. John, China is not the predominant world power at this point, although the signs point towards that being the case economically in the near future.
BUT, we(china) have a long way to go even after we equal and surpass the US economy, because we do have... like 3-4 times the population.. each amelikan got $10, each Chinese got $3, (not really) but u get what i mean.
Militarily, there is no equal to the U.S. looking at world defence spending (US spends 50%).. also chinese military technology although not easily accessed or documented is .. let's be honest, at least a generation behind (being very generous).
MM I love the art of war. I also read the art of war (converted for business purposes).. This led me down a path researching a lot of chinese philosophy and I must say I was blown away. blown the #$%^ away.. Don't know if you're interested but I can email u something on that if u like.
The west is built on that shit (warmongering and imperialism) and throughout history, empires have risen and fallen (mongols, romans, persians, british etc).
History has already shown time and time again the result of taking certain paths.
And for some reason, some people just can't see that..
oh P.S I just came back to add that if there's any other peoples out there who also share an interest in this topic and would like to exchange ideas and talk more holla at me!
(and yes I just realised I sound like a douche for calling myself amateur expert lol)
B,
I heard of him vaguely trying to promote his books several years ago. This guy is another neocon hack defending the same Reagan policies Bush embraced during his tenure. I think he sorely misses the point himself actually.
John,
I'm actually with you on this one and I will explain in the response to LXY below.
LXY,
My "red" brother from another mother. Very valid points indeed, but I would differ from you because I think the philosophy Sun Tzu espoused is contrary to Militarism.
You are right, multilateralism is in fact on America's terms only. However, my case in point, military might is old 19th-20th century theory that the US of A continues to project all over the globe. If the USA wants to spend billions on war and defense so it can have the latest and greatest killing machines known to man, China would not give two cares in the world. If they want to waste their money, lives, and energy invading smaller countries, China would sit back and laugh as America falters.
In essence, the US is not only protecting its own interests, it's protecting China's interest. If America wants to play top cop around the world and police the heavy seas of Chinese imports, they will do so at the cost of American taxpayers. America could put missile defense systems in Poland, Turkey -- hell -- they can put one on the Beijing harbor pointed at Tiananmen Square and China would not be phased. Simply put, it will never ever ever be used.
But let's just simplify the bottom line, they need the up-and-down nod from China.
This is the 21st century. China already knows it can not match the military prowess of America and stand toe-to-toe with her in fire power.
When Hu gave "W" that book, even though it is a common gift among diplomats, there was an underlying message that wasn't so subtle.
http://www.securityaffairs.org/issues/2009/16/mazanec.php
"In many ways, China’s contemporary focus on cyberwarfare is an extension of traditional Chinese stratagems, namely Sun Tzu’s “overcoming the superior with the inferior” (i.e., asymmetric warfare) and Chairman Mao Zedong’s concept of “People’s War.” It is intimately connected to the country’s broader geopolitical strategic interests: regime survival; dominance in the Asia/Pacific region; growing influence on a global level; and prevention of Taiwan’s independence, coupled with its ultimate assimilation into the PRC.2"
I believe we had folks testifying before congress a couple months ago confirming these grave concerns to our incompetent leaders at capitol hill.
That's really where its at. Billion dollar aircraft carriers that cost billions to operate and modern day warfare strategies are as obsolete as a transport pigeons. Beijing has Washington's communication satellites pinned down to the bare ass of a donkey.
Economically, it's only a matter of years until China commands the largest share of the world's market.
Mask,
Army officer, eh? I'm not sure if it's required reading at OCS Fort Bragg. You should definitely give it a thorough read before hand.
Rob,
I think we are all amateur experts on this topic. This is very new territory. AOW is used by plenty of CEO's around the world. I mean, shit, I swear by it to this day and apply much of it to blogging as I can. As far as military spending, I think throwing more money at the defense department serves no better purpose than to put yourself into more debt.
TMM:
Hanson is maybe even worse than a hack. You wouldn't believe how much he bends over in that book to "prove" Western superiority. Seriously, he talks about how Japan beat the Russians, and he's like, "Oh, well they were using Western war techniques! I told you the West was superior. Nanny nanny foo foo!!"
Some people turn off their logic when they want to prove a point.
As you can see, (western) modern warfare serves little purpose nowadays except for peace time presence. Japan, during that era, emerged as the greatest western power in the east. But today, from lessons learned, even Japanese know you don't fight with battleships anymore. The last aircraft that was shot down by a warship was an Iranian airliner. That's how often we use war ships outside or maritime patrolling.
MM: With all due respect, I have to disagree.
America is "protecting" China's interest? No.
This idea that the USA is some kind of benevolent "global policeman" is a rationalization that America has always used to justify its self-serving militarism around the world.
America protects its own interests first, middle, and last. All countries act according to their own self-interest. But the USA is off the charts and supercedes all norms.
Thus, in terms of America's bogus War on Terror, one of the real reasons why the USA invaded Central Asia and Iraq is to GAIN CONTROL OVER ENERGY RESOURCES that the USA's economic competitors like Europe, Japan, India ... and China depend upon.
By controlling the spigot of Middle Eastern and Caspian oil and gas, America gains geopolitical control/leverage over these economic competitors and in fact the world.
Oil, Power & Empire: Iraq and the US Global Agenda
http://www.larryeverest.com/book-ope.htm
Indeed, China increasingly figures in the American mind as one of the USA's many, many "enemies" that must be controlled.
That URL you cited from Security Affairs says as much. It seems a tired rehash of The China Threat that has become a veritable cottage industry in America. Too bad, it never questions the possibility that the USA is the real threat to peace.
After all, which country has invaded and subjugated Iraq and Afghanistan under false premises and genocided over 1 million people so far? The USA.
In general, America's fraudulent War on Terror is about global conquest in order to maintain US supremacy--including *economic* supremacy.
Smaller nations like Iraq and Afghanistan are only the prelude for American confrontation and threats towards Eurasia. This means Russia and China.
As I mentioned above, this US military doctrine is called Full Spectrum Dominance. In short, global American Empire.
"Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order" http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14046
This America agenda was effectively spelled out in official documents like the 2002 US National Security Strategy as well as semi-official think tanks like the Project for a New American Century (now rebranded as The Foreign Policy Initiative)
Manifesto for world dictatorship
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/22/1032055033082.html
The Project for the New American Century http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm
Ultimately, America is using military means to maintain its own economic dominance and the US way of life--against all challengers.
Remember what Dick Cheney once said, "the American way of life is non-negotiable."
Many Americans refuse to consider these issues, as it would force them to question everything they have been taught about the USA as the supposed Beacon of Liberty.
Back in the 1980s, the USA called the Soviet Union the "evil empire."
But I think this was a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
LXY,
In many ways I do agree with that argument and the strong points that you have cited. Respectfully, I think we give our government far too much credit.
Interesting discussion. We should probably leave it at this because I don't want our blogger relationship to have a falling out and die like Robert McNamara. =)
An essay about Chosun naval admiral Yi Sun-shin, student of Sun Tzu asymmetric military tactics.
http://badassoftheweek.com/admiralyi.html
Designer of the "kobukson" (my namesake), which means, "turtle ship", the world's first armored warship.
http://www.koreanhero.net/en/TurtleShip.htm
Thanks for the links, kobukson. I just learned something. Have you read "1421: The Year China Discovered America"?
hey MM u know what man,
at first when i read ur reply to LXY i thought, what is this mm guy talking about..
now i read it again, it makes sense. i can definately see where you're coming from. maybe when u said US is protecting chinas interests u could have added 'unwittingly' or something lol
because.. (lol) US and China are by no means best pals.. yet.. although who knows.. maybe one day when china commands the type of respect that westerners "fear" then we can all be 'friends'! haha
good post !
Post a Comment