Military Literature

[Podweed]

Yep, that was what I was thinking. Kidding too.

 

Just bought a book for P95.00 called Gates of Fire by Steven Pressfield about the battle of Thermopylae. Looks interesting. I'll probably finish it by tomorrow.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

May I recommend Colleen McCullough's The Masters of Rome books? Am sure you'll enjoy them if you like ancient militaries.

[Podweed]

podweed wrote:

 

"Entebbe, I think, is one reason why B. Netanyahu won't make peace with the Arabs. His older brother was commander of that raid. Sadly, he also was its only casualty (if memory serves)."

 

-yup. noni netanyahu was the only israeli military casualty at entebbe. sadly, he was also the last addition to the entebbe team, joining just before the raid.  muki betser was the israeli military attache to uganda, just prior to idi amin (who was originally a big israeli fan, and trained by the israelis as a paratrooper) losing what little of his mind he had left, the full story is given "secret soldier".

corkscrew wrote:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Is that a true story? I remember reading from several books that Idi Amin's instructors swore he was too scared to even jump out of the plane.

[Podweed]

Question, guys:

 

If, in World War 2, Russia had been defeated, do you think the Allies could've successfully mounted an invasion of Festung Europa?

 

And conversely, if Overlord foundered in the Channel, would the Reich have had enough fight left in it to stop the Red Army?

[Corkscrew]

podweed wrote:

"Thick Face, Black Heart" (ancient Chinese treatise)

 

i don't think this falls under ancient chinese treatise as it was written by chin-ning chu in 1992. the ideas were based on a book by lee zhong wu called "thick black theory" first published in 1911, again not particularly ancient. having read this numerous times i wouldn't even label it as military.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Damn... You're right about this. It isn't an ancient treatise but rather discusses "thick black theory" as you had mentioned. About it not being military, please read on after Hagakure.

 

"Hagakure" (Hidden Behi(n)d the Leaves), by Yamomoto Tsunetomo

 

a good read, but not really what i would call a military strategy book, more a "how to live like a samurai should" book. pretty much ignored in japan, it has a bad reputation there, but really popular among western samurai groupies and wannabes. interestingly, no record could be found of tsunetomo actually participating in a duel or in any battle. also, hagakure asserts that bushido is really the "way of dying", and that a samurai must be willing to die at any moment in order to be true to his lord. so, despite the ban on seppuku by the tokugawa shogunate, why didn't he follow his master to death if he was such an ideal samurai? not a high endorsement for somebody who wrote "the way of the warrior is death".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What encompasses something that is "military" to begin with? How do you define that? Clearly every nation that has gone into warfare has delved into (either purposefully or blindly stumbled across) psychological warfare. The mental framework of a soldier, the civilian populace - be it friend or foe - is just as important as the machinery & technology that goes into war.

 

Morale is yet another topic which is related to this, and is of utmost importance especially in times of setbacks & prolonged warfare.

 

Your assessment of Hagakure is valid. I see clearly how you came to your assesment of the book. But, my understanding of this book is NOT the same. In my opinion, the book can be summarized in just one word - RESOLVE. This was the entire message of the book. The very title "hidden behind the leaves" (which is what the word Hagakure translates into English from Japanese to begin with) begs that question of the readers to discover exactly what IT is... what is hidden behind the leaves. The primary supposition of this book, is that even if a soldier lacked skill... if he was armed with RESOLVE, then he is more dangerous than a handful of highly skilled warriors who lacked it. Terrorism is abundant with this. Terrorists embrace it as a fact, and use it to their advantage. How do you think suicide bombers manage to do what they do so well? Surely it isn't a matter of technology, superior weaponry or advanced psi-war theorems, it is a simple matter of RESOLVE.

 

The famed Kamikaze Pilots of World War II are stereotypical of this trait. Did they do significant damage to aircraft carriers during the Pacific War? Did they sink just one navy vessel? Numerous military historians have noted their success, especially against the wooden-floor based aircraft carriers of the US. While some psychologists would propose that they were insane, I do not think that an insane individual can successfully pilot an aircraft. Much less, if the controls were hampered by having bullet-ridden control surfaces, or perhaps even a bloody burning cockpit. Something greater than insanity was present.

 

 

 

A little about Philosophy and Logic my friend: two of the most fundamental subject matters dealt with in the study of Philosophy are TRUTH and LOGICAL FALLACY.

 

To put it simply, the Truth Is.

 

To expound: the Truth is independent of anything, it just is. Popularity, consensus or general acceptance does not alter truth. Neither does authority affect truth.

 

Whether the general populace of Japan hates the book is irrelevant to the fact that the book contains Truths.

 

If I wrote an article on Japanese martial arts, and say "The Japanese love JUDO" and try to pass it as an absolute Truth... then I am damned from the beginning. Because clearly some Japanese love KARATE as well. How about AIKIDO? REI KI KEN? KENDO? Etc. Clearly I would have to qualify my statement.

 

There was a time wherein the whole population of our planet believed that the world was flat. Belief or acceptance did not make it even one bit flatter... it remains round regardless of whatever consensus was achieved.

 

Yamomoto Tsunetomo's lack of duelling records doesn't make his words any less True, they either are or they aren't. Regardless of whether he was a superior swordsman or an "ideal" samurai by way of seppuku, does not change the fact that he had an idea of what BUSHIDO is really all about. Thats exactly his point: RESOLVE makes the Samurai. Not anything else.

 

And finally, Authority doesn't make something either True or False. Albert Einstein during his latter days was asked to compute mathematically if the Universe was expanding or not. He publicly announced that the Universe was in STASIS. Being the foremost Physicist on the planet, everyone but Volta believed him. Volta challenged his computations, and Albert Einstein reviewed them. Finally, he came to the conclusion that he had made an ERROR, and recanted his statement publicly- saying that the Universe IS expanding. Ergo even the foremost Authority in PHYSICS can make errors regarding his primary specialization. This is a classic example of how even "Authorities" on specific subject matters cannot make something TRUE or FALSE either by assertion or reputation. Albert Einstein retired in shame after the above-mentioned incident.

 

The truth is.

 

regards,

 

Corky

[Dr_PepPeR]

Question, guys:

 

If, in World War 2, Russia had been defeated, do you think the Allies could've successfully mounted an invasion of Festung Europa?

 

I don't think so. Defeating Russia would have enabled the OKH to transfer more panzer and infantry divisions to beef up the defenses in France. When the allies invaded, the Panzer Divisions were kept as a mobile reserve, stationed some miles beyond the beach. If more Panzer Divisions were available, they could have been staged closer to the invasion areas and could have stopped the allies cold at the beaches.

 

And conversely, if Overlord foundered in the Channel, would the Reich have had enough fight left in it to stop the Red Army?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I still think the Red Army was unstoppable in 1945, especially after Sorge's intelligence coup that Japan would not invade the USSR. This enable Stalin to pour the whole resources of the Red Army to roll up Berlin. The Reich would still have been forced to "watch their back" in France, and would in effect be still fighting a two front war.

[Dr_PepPeR]

podweed wrote:

 

 

others i enjoy reading about:

 

the french foreign legion

the gurkhas (i've worked with them before, and i'll say it again without reservation: they are the best soldiers in the f.u.c.k.i.n.g. universe)

spetsnaz (voiska spetsialnoye naznachenia, russian special forces)

 

any more come to mind i'll be back.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have a book on the Gurkhas as well as the History of the French Foreign Legion. Very interesting reading although I felt saddened by what happened to the Gurkhas after India became independent and to the FFL after the mutiny of the parachute brigade in Algiers.

[Podweed]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Really? Were the Panzers held back in reserve or were the Germans deceived into thinking the Allied invasion force would land in Calais instead of Normandy (that was what most generals thought, including Von Rundstedt)? The Allied 'maskirova' worked. I think it was a combination of both.

[ken_2_10_nah]

Leo Kessler's "SS Panzer Battalion Wotan" series

[hellspawn]

"What encompasses something that is "military" to begin with? How do you define that?"

 

i don't know about you, but as far as i'm aware the definition of military is:

-armed forces

-members of the armed forces

-of or relating to the study of armed warfare

-characteristic of, or associated, to soldiers or the military

-associated with or performed by armed services as contrasted with civilians

-the military forces of a nation

 

would samurai be defined as military? i would say no. they were a martial class in a confined, rigid and hierarchical society.

 

"Clearly every nation that has gone into warfare has delved into (either purposefully or blindly stumbled across) psychological warfare."

 

agreed. however, psywar is a subset, a very narrow part of actual, total, warfare; and it is mainly performed against the enemy. to use it on your own population changes it from psywar to to something else.

 

"The mental framework of a soldier, the civilian populace - be it friend or foe - is just as important as the machinery & technology that goes into war...Morale is yet another topic which is related to this, and is of utmost importance especially in times of setbacks & prolonged warfare."

 

agreed.

 

as for the rest, what i'll say about hagakure kikigaki is: when tashiro tsuramoto began compiling the sayings and reflections of yamamoto tsunetomo between 1709 and 1716, japan had been at peace for 100 years, and the samurai were rapidly becoming irrelevant as a warrior class in japanese society. by the way, hagakure kikigaki translates more faithfully into "notes of what was heard in the shadow of leaves", a reference to the conversations between tsuramoto and tsunetomo taking place in the garden of the monastery tsunetomo had retired to, rather than to anything mystical or profound to be discovered in the leafpile.

 

yamamoto tsunetomo was a samurai, without much distinction, who served nabeshima mitsushige in minor positions.

 

you found resolve in hagakure, i found it to be the ramblings of an old man longing for a time period that he not only missed, but was actively pining for. sort of like the dottery old grandfather who bores everybody with tales of how brave he was during some long forgotten battle that he was probably never at.

 

tsunetomo comes across as a nostalgia freak who seems to regret that the widespread slaughter and bloodshed of middle ages japan was no longer around. his death worship borders on the fanatic, and his insistence that the samurai has only two duties, to serve and to die in service, is very narrow minded.

 

he says: "merit lies more in dying for one's master than in striking down the enemy." which would leave a daimyo very short staffed if all his retainers felt the same way. (where are my samurai? master, they have all fallen for you. how many of the enemy did they k*ll? well, there was a slight problem with that my lord...)

 

contrast this attitude to musashi's: "there is no other point to conflict than victory over your opponent".

 

while there are many merits to hagakure, a lot of it cannot be brought over into modern life for the simple reason that it relates to a time and place that no longer exist.

 

if somebody were to insult your boss, would you run out, cut his head off and present to your boss as a sign that the insult has been avenged?

 

here's another one: "The late jin'emon said that it is better not to bring up daughters. they are a blemish to the family name and a shame to the parents. the eldest daughter is special, but it is better to disregard the others".

 

hagakure is best described by it's translator, william scott wilson:

 

"to speak of the Hagakure it is perhaps best to state first what it is not: that is, a well-thought-out philosophy, either in the sense of containing a closely reasoned or logical argument, or in terms of subject matter. on the contrary, it contains an antiintellectural or antischolastic bent throughout, and being a record of a seven-year-span of conversations, the subject matter varies considerably, ranging from the author's deepest feelings concerning the way of the samurai to discussions on the implements of the tea ceremony or how a certain mansion acquired its name."

 

oh by the way, in case you were wondering about the references to "shodo" in the book, they refer to the initiation into, and acts of, homosexuality, which most samurai practiced. a fact glossed over by the macho samurai groupies and wannabes of today.

 

i'll close with this, the fact that he didn't duel or particiapte in a battle is of importance to me at least. i'm not about to accept advice on fighting and warfare from somebody who has never experienced either.

 

a little about skepticism: the truth may be, but i'm not about to take anyone's word for it until i see it or experience it.

[willow_boy]

Really? Were the Panzers held back in reserve or were the Germans deceived into thinking the Allied invasion force would land in Calais instead of Normandy (that was what most generals thought, including Von Rundstedt)? The Allied 'maskirova' worked. I think it was a combination of both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Based on documentaries I saw on the History Channel, the Germans decided to hold their panzers in reserve because they were indeed anticipating that Allied landings were going to take place in the Pas de Calais region. This belief was brought about by a great ruse that the Americans and the British perpetrated on the Germans for months before Overlord. The Allies created phantom divisions and locations and created radio traffic between these phantom divisions to create the impression among the Germans that the Allied landings will take place in the Calais region.

 

A few German generals (but they were in the minority) really believed that Normandy was the likely point of landing due to the fact that the Allies expected that the Germans WON'T EXPECT them to land there. It also didn't help either that when the landings started on the early morning of June 6th that the panzers could not be deployed immediately because the Wehrmacht's generals were under very strict orders to obtain Hitler's blessings before the tanks could be deployed. It is one of the sad and tragic stories of WW2 for the Germans that their supposed great Fuehrer, Hitler, was still asleep and could not be roused from his sleep while his men were getting blasted and dying in Normandy waiting for tanks that came too late to make a difference in the outcome of the battle.

[Dr_PepPeR]

Based on documentaries I saw on the History Channel, the Germans decided to hold their panzers in reserve because they were indeed anticipating that Allied landings were going to take place in the Pas de Calais region.  This belief was brought about by a great ruse that the Americans and the British perpetrated on the Germans for months before Overlord.  The Allies created phantom divisions and locations and created radio traffic between these phantom divisions to create the impression among the Germans that the Allied landings will take place in the Calais region.

 

A few German generals (but they were in the minority) really believed that Normandy was the likely point of landing due to the fact that the Allies expected that the Germans WON'T EXPECT them to land there.  It also didn't help either that when the landings started on the early morning of June 6th that the panzers could not be deployed immediately because the Wehrmacht's generals were under very strict orders to obtain Hitler's blessings before the tanks could be deployed.  It is one of the sad and tragic stories of WW2 for the Germans that their supposed great Fuehrer, Hitler, was still asleep and could not be roused from his sleep while his men were getting blasted and dying in Normandy waiting for tanks that came too late to make a difference in the outcome of the battle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is what I have been led to believe too. Unfortunately for the Germans, the deployment of any Panzer Division required the personal clearance of Hitler.

Edited May 6, 2006 by Dr_PepPeR

[Podweed]

Based on documentaries I saw on the History Channel, the Germans decided to hold their panzers in reserve because they were indeed anticipating that Allied landings were going to take place in the Pas de Calais region.  This belief was brought about by a great ruse that the Americans and the British perpetrated on the Germans for months before Overlord.  The Allies created phantom divisions and locations and created radio traffic between these phantom divisions to create the impression among the Germans that the Allied landings will take place in the Calais region.

 

A few German generals (but they were in the minority) really believed that Normandy was the likely point of landing due to the fact that the Allies expected that the Germans WON'T EXPECT them to land there.  It also didn't help either that when the landings started on the early morning of June 6th that the panzers could not be deployed immediately because the Wehrmacht's generals were under very strict orders to obtain Hitler's blessings before the tanks could be deployed.  It is one of the sad and tragic stories of WW2 for the Germans that their supposed great Fuehrer, Hitler, was still asleep and could not be roused from his sleep while his men were getting blasted and dying in Normandy waiting for tanks that came too late to make a difference in the outcome of the battle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Reads and sounds like "The Longest Day".

 

Why is it tragic? Be thankful things turned out the way they did. Else, Overlord's forces might have been overrun.

[willow_boy]

Reads and sounds like "The Longest Day".

 

Why is it tragic? Be thankful things turned out the way they did. Else, Overlord's forces might have been overrun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's tragic from a human point of view. There is no debate here that thankfully, the Allies won the war. However, the average German soldier, like the average Allied soldier, was only following orders. In this particular case, he and a lot of his comrades were sent to their deaths because of the inhumanity of their leader.

[willow_boy]

I just want to share following books from my personal collection:

 

1. Wehrmacht, An Illustrated History - by John Pimlott (History of the Wehrmacht from 1933 to 1945)

2. Warsaw of Asia: The Rape of Manila - by Bonifacio Escoda (about the bloodly liberation of Manila in 1945)

[Dr_PepPeR]

Another area of interest for me is the science fiction military genre, like novels and short stories by David Drake, Jerry Pournelle, Harry Turtledove and William Dietz.