• Member Since 21st Mar, 2019
  • offline last seen Wednesday

RubyDubious


Eyy, I'm writin 'ere!

More Blog Posts19

  • 33 weeks
    Coming Soon!

    Oh shit, how do I work these things again? I think I just type in them and people read that, hopefully.

    Read More

    5 comments · 97 views
  • 49 weeks
    The Big One, or, A Mishmashed Treatise and Updates to my Idleness

    Woah! Is that Ruby with a blog? It's been like forever since she's done anything on the site, I thought she forgot about it and stopped reading. That was my impression of you, how'd I do? Anyway, bad jokes aside, to answer the burning question likely none of you had, yes I still remain, and indeed I do still read. In fact, since my last blog, I've read 4 books, and I'm halfway through number 5.

    Read More

    0 comments · 88 views
  • 63 weeks
    A Blog From Beyond The Social Grave

    Yes! It is I! Ruby the Great and Soon-To-Be-Well-Read, and also Not Dead. It's been far too long since we've last spoken, but it's also been far too busy and stressful lately to be able to tack anything down here, as I'd have next to nothing to report. But for now, I do have something to report: A completed book, and a soon to be completed book. That is, Rosseau's The Social Contract

    Read More

    3 comments · 110 views
  • 74 weeks
    Three Books, And General Updatery

    So I've been gone for a while, huh? Seems par for the course that I should be completely radio silent and then come back all at once. Well, I tell you that you shouldn't expect that for much longer. That stick bug story was the start of a few stories I want to post weekly, that I've made a backlog of to post weekly. This is to be more regular, of course. Though, before you get up in arms,

    Read More

    3 comments · 97 views
  • 78 weeks
    On War: The Big One

    Greetings small ponies! It is I, Ziltoid the Omniscient and writer of War Against the Sun, broadcasting telepathically into your minds once again about an update as to my readings from the mile-long list of books. This time, it was Clausewitz's On War, a very solid book, if but very long and very dense in its language. Apologies for the radio silence, I've been very busy and also trying to read

    Read More

    3 comments · 98 views
Jul
18th
2020

On War: The Big One · 9:03pm Jul 18th, 2020

Greetings small ponies! It is I, Ziltoid the Omniscient and writer of War Against the Sun, broadcasting telepathically into your minds once again about an update as to my readings from the mile-long list of books. This time, it was Clausewitz's On War, a very solid book, if but very long and very dense in its language. Apologies for the radio silence, I've been very busy and also trying to read this 200-year-old book. I recently got a job at a local factory and will continue to work there for the next five weeks before my contract's up. It's grueling, and I dislike it so, but I need the money so I will endure it. There's a silver lining in it too, when I get to writing industry in WAtS, I will have personal experience in it.

Now about what I read and less about me. Wait... Anyways, On War amounted for 14 pages in my notes, which are now 84 pages and 31k words. This is about just theory, not about any planning for the story itself. About the book, right? Tell the class what I learned, right? Well On War is composed of four books: The Nature of War, On the Theory of War, Of Strategy in General, and The Combat.

Throughout the text, Clausewitz hammers several points home constantly, and these are the lesson I'll impart on you today. Firstly, that war is the imposing of state force to meet a particular goal. It's a tool the state uses to meet its ends or its aims where they conflict with other nations. It's not some nebulous concept or occurrence as the uneducated on the topic would think. That is that war is about valor, or honor, or duty, or any such vagueness. Plainly put, it is the imposing of will by the state by bloody force. This can be either to conquer or to capitulate, though the latter is conquering to the point of pointed surrender.

Another thing Clausewitz touches upon exhaustively is the point that war is not one action or one battle. It is not through one action or inaction that war is lost or won, or even that a battle is decided. It is the total of all added events in a battle that make it, and the total of those battles that makes war. It is not the taking of one point, one city, or one objective. It is not even victory, because he submits that you cannot have total victory as there will always be forces to replace the ones you beat, and moreover, that the victory is relative. That is, the factors that led to your triumph were only greater in relation to your enemy's, not that they are always superior and will always bring victory. For example, 100 people beat 10 in an outpost. Clean cut victory in that extremely boiled down hypothetical, right? Well that force of 10 you just beat has reinforcements of 300 coming. And if your initial objection is mine, "Well what if they run out of soldiers?" They will not.

What? What are you saying, Ruby? That's insane! They don't have a soldier printing machine with stickers on it! You're correct, however, this leads into his next point: War's main goal is the destruction of the enemy's forces, attacking or defending. However, war is also the destruction of enemy forces to, again, an end. By the time you get remotely close to killing every enemy soldier, the enemy would've unconditionally surrendered. In that, there will always be reinforcements so long as they are in a position to send them, and it's then your task destroy them and conquer them until their hand is forced to shake with yours as you smile into the camera.

The last big point I'll touch upon is how Clausewitz views war. Note how I am shortening this for brevity, because I don't want to copy-paste my notes. There are many other points, and exponentially more notes I've taken that will, like battles in a campaign, add up to a great epic.

Clausewitz says near the end of the book something to the effect of, "Let us hear nothing of Generals that conquer without bloodshed. If a General fights a bloody slaughter, then it is out of respect for the art. Napoleon's campaigns may be remarked as barbaric, but the lesson learned is not to go back to war by the dress sword and commanded by must institutions. Because the dress sword is duller than the one for combat, and if society blunts its sword, then someone will come in and decapitate it." And while chilling, pragmatic, and possibly a bit detached, I believe he has a point.

What's not said is the scale of tragedy a war is, and that the carcass of a battlefield is an affront to humanity. However, one can view war as both an atrocity and a necessity. As long as there are people with violent goals, or otherwise goals that can only be accomplished through violence, there will be conflicts adding up to a war. As long as there is bloodlust, or things that only bloodlust can accomplish, there will be war. And there will always be incentive for war, there will always be profiteers to the conflict, and there will always be fanatic desire to kill. That is, until we move beyond that. The instant we move past scarcity, prejudice, bigotry, ignorance, and greed is the instant wars will cease. However, society is far from that, and it pushes the finish line back itself because it has a vested interest in running the race. However, the finish line will reach a point that's off a cliff. Rather grim, isn't it? Well, it's a blog post about a war theory book, where the author posits that war is a slaughter, but it's a necessary one, so that tracks.

Anyway, love you all. Best wishes from me to you, and hopefully, from you to me. Take care of yourselves, wear a mask, black lives matter, fuck nazis, Ruby out.

Comments ( 3 )

Nice way to relay what you've learned. I've always had a casual interest on the topic of war, so this was an enjoyable and educational read. Keep it up.

Solidarity comrade. Saw your posts on knighty’s blog.

Login or register to comment