Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sun Tzu's 2,500-Year-Old 'Art of War' Guides China's Strategy Today
newsmax.com ^ | Friday, Sept. 8, 2006 | Lev Navrozov

Posted on 09/10/2006 9:20:42 AM PDT by Korvac

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 next last
To: Cringing Negativism Network

Bump! Wake up America!


21 posted on 09/10/2006 10:55:00 AM PDT by 1ofmanyfree ((No jobs, licenses,mortgages,bank accounts or amnesty for any illegal alien criminals ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Yes I have met stupid Chinese people. Quite a few, in fact.


22 posted on 09/10/2006 11:08:53 AM PDT by packrat35 (guest worker/day worker=SlaveMart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

Napoleon had a translation of Sun Tzu's writings. Clauswitz wrote his remarks (which were put into book form by his wife) based on Napoleon's campaigns (seen by an opponent).

Jomni and Dennis Hart Mahan are my favorite military authors. The latter promulgated simple Principles of war, to make correct actions accessable to a wide spectrum of people in a republic, and the former used geometry and quantitative aspects to permit analysis by professionals.


23 posted on 09/10/2006 11:40:19 AM PDT by donmeaker (If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

I think it is rather funny that the article asserts that Stalin first didn't defend Moscow, and then asserts that he was in a Siberian hideaway.

The Soviets built three defensive rings around the city. An aquaintence of mind got a severe case of frostbite in Tula, a city just east of Moscow, where they tried to bypass the defensive rings, and were subject to counter attack.


24 posted on 09/10/2006 11:44:15 AM PDT by donmeaker (If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

"I am told that in contrast to European countries, China was never engaged in conquests such as the conquest of America, mistaken for India by Columbus. This is true. Columbus was after gold and slaves, while China had paper money, and there was nothing she wanted to buy from other countries, which were perceived by China, with its silks and porcelains, as populated by paupers and savages. It was ridiculous to suppose that anyone wanted to topple the sophisticated Center of the World in order to establish a Western savage pauperland."

The Mongols did in fact topple China. Columbus was not trying to capture gold or slaves, rather, he was seeking a route (not controled by Muslims) to get spices, and thought, using references in the Bible, that the earth was 3/5th its actual size.


25 posted on 09/10/2006 11:49:18 AM PDT by donmeaker (If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

"In World War II, Hitler also fought, without winning, for more than four years. Sun Tzu's key word 25 centuries ago was strategy. In post-Roman Europe, the word was borrowed (from Greek) in 1810, and so Hitler knew it. But his fighting of World War II shows no trace of grand strategy and hence could end in nothing but his suicide."

Hitler became chancellor in 1933. He uses strategy remilitarize the Rheinland, to support Franco in Spain, to take Austria, to take Czechoslovakia. All this happened without fighting.

Hitler coordinated with the Soviet Union in dismemberment of Poland. He took over France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway. After Dunkirk, Britain (with Churchill as PM!) did some serious teasing and appeasing, to convince Hitler to leave Britain alone and head east. That is when the Strategos stopped.

He came darn near to winning. Alas that FDR didn't send over one Marine regiment to counter his remilitarization of the Rhineland. Alas, we weren't so clever to do "preemptive" war back then. Some still oppose it, and want to go back to the good old days of 400,000 US deaths in war.


26 posted on 09/10/2006 11:57:52 AM PDT by donmeaker (If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy!" then my ex wife is out of town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick

Thanks for that post. Moving forward with a strong alliance with India is very important to balance against China in the long term. People say that China has never been an "expansionist" power, but that may just be because they never had enough power to really be expansionist. We should guard against the possibility.


27 posted on 09/10/2006 12:12:37 PM PDT by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

The Art of War should be required reading for every HS student.


28 posted on 09/10/2006 12:15:13 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

Thanks For The Thread,,,Psalm 144:1


29 posted on 09/10/2006 12:53:08 PM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

In my experience, the only business people who take The Art or War or Machiavelli's The Prince seriously are half-wits.


30 posted on 09/10/2006 12:56:07 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: durasell
In my experience, the only business people who take The Art or War or Machiavelli's The Prince seriously are half-wits.

Who do you think Machiavelli was writing to?

31 posted on 09/10/2006 1:38:36 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The only good Mullah is a dead Mullah. The only good Mosque is the one that used to be there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

Who do you think Machiavelli was writing to?



Ha!

The thing people don't realize is that ole Machie was writing to curry favor after making some political blunders and finding himself outside the charmed circle.


32 posted on 09/10/2006 1:49:54 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

Sun Tzu knows the drill. More people ought to look into him because he knows the drill.


33 posted on 09/10/2006 4:06:08 PM PDT by JOE43270 (JOE43270, God Bless America and All Who Have and Will Defend Her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: voletti

China will not be a democracy. For their culture, it would make no sense.

Hopefully, they either see us as not a threat to them (which is doubtful) or to strong to take on (which is what they see now, but for not much longer).

The next world war will be in Asia. China needs the resources of its neighbors to advance, and as long as they give her that all is fine. But one day someone will say no, and troops will be sent in.


34 posted on 09/10/2006 4:51:09 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: norraad
So, why are we fighting like drunken retards?

Because we are drunk with "free trade" while our enemy builds up its industrial base at the expense of ours. We won WWII because we could self supply. We can't even come close to that now. Heck, we don't even make our own ammo for the rifles anymore.

35 posted on 09/10/2006 4:52:38 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: redgolum

Mark Steyn predicts China will creep in and take over the vast expanse of northern Asia (Eastern Siberia) as depopulating Russia vacates and retreats west of the Urals.

Another expansionist opportunity for BEijing would be central Asia and there the pickings again would be ripe indeed.

Places like Indo-China etc are too much trouble militarily speaking for the resources they offer.

My 2 cents.


36 posted on 09/10/2006 5:01:07 PM PDT by voletti (Awareness and Equanimity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Korvac

The Chinese had better hold onto their butts. They're reading Sun Tzu, our guys are reading John Boyd.


37 posted on 09/10/2006 6:42:43 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (We didn’t lose 3,000 people that day. We lost one wonderful person at a time, 3,000 times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CJ Wolf
They were allied with the taliban

Citation?

38 posted on 09/10/2006 6:48:35 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (We didn’t lose 3,000 people that day. We lost one wonderful person at a time, 3,000 times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

Excellent post. Although I consider China a major threat, it gets tiresome to see so many on FR treating them as some sort of supermen. They're just another bunch of commies, and we'll clean their clocks too if they don't do it to themselves first.


39 posted on 09/10/2006 6:54:27 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (We didn’t lose 3,000 people that day. We lost one wonderful person at a time, 3,000 times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
Alas that FDR didn't send over one Marine regiment to counter his remilitarization of the Rhineland.

Alas even more that the Brits or French didn't take care of it. IIRC, Hitler remarked later that a French brigade could have stopped the rein of his Reich before it started.

40 posted on 09/10/2006 6:58:08 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (We didn’t lose 3,000 people that day. We lost one wonderful person at a time, 3,000 times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson