President Bush Could Learn a Lot from Sun Tzu

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,136
Location
Washed out of Four-dollar Bayou. Now I'm... somewh
Published on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 by the Baltimore Sun (Maryland)
President Bush Could Learn a Lot from Sun Tzu
by John Lang

Dear Mr. President,

It's too bad The Art of War wasn't on your summer reading list. If you'd read it, maybe we wouldn't be mired in Iraq. According to the author, Sun Tzu, esteemed for thousands of years as the Sage of Warfare, you're doing it all wrong.

Exactly what military principles you've broken - and how many - I learned by chance. On the first day of classes at Washington College, the title on a shelf of paperbacks caught my eye. I opened at random and found this on Page 10: "In war, better take a state intact than destroy it."

Then came a critique of your plan to recall reservists for more tours: "The skillful warrior never conscripts troops a second time." And, "Supplying an army at a distance drains the public coffers. ... Six-tenths are spent on broken chariots, worn-out horses." That last is archaically put, but don't we have thousands of war-wrecked Humvees and tanks now - while short of funds to fix them?

On Page 13, I found: "Treat prisoners of war kindly, and care for them." How does that square with Guantanamo?

Page after page, Sun Tzu has something to say to you, even though the principles were stated something like 2,500 years ago.

But your reading list this summer, so the White House said, included a three-volume history of the Louisiana Purchase. In a summer past, as casualties mounted, we were told you read a comprehensive history of salt.

That's hardly as germane as The Art of War, which states, "No nation has ever benefited from a protracted war."

Of course, reading lists of politicians are always suspect. You feed doubts when you tell us that this summer you also read "three Shakespeares." Your aides have said you don't read their briefing papers but direct them to read them to you.

Then why not get those neocons who advised you into this war to give Master Sun a glance? Vice President Dick Cheney owns the book; according to news reports, Chinese officials gave Mr. Cheney an out-of-print copy valued at $3,600, though it's not clear whether he's read it.

Perhaps your advisers can slip Sun Tzu's maxims into the daily digest. After, say, the latest blurb on slaughter between Sunni and Shiite factions, an aide could read:

"Without knowing the plans of the feudal lords, you cannot form alliances."

Or, before another retired general or formerly supportive Republican congressman goes looking for Iraq's back door, your reader can find: "When an army is confused and perplexed, the feudal princes will cause trouble. This creates chaos in the ranks and gives away victory."

Sir, you can be certain, if you don't know Sun Tzu, your enemies do. It's the revolutionary's primer. Mao Tse-tung carried a copy on his Long March. It was Fidel Castro's campfire reading when he was hiding out in the Sierra Maestre.

Can the teachings have escaped the notice of Osama bin Laden? Not likely. Consider The Art of War on evasion: "He changes his ways and alters his plans to keep the enemy in ignorance." Also, "The highest skill in forming dispositions is to be without form; formlessness is proof against the prying of the subtlest spy and the machinations of the wisest brain."

Concluding, "The place I intend to attack must not be known; if it is unknown, the enemy will have to reinforce many places ... but I shall attack few." And, "Throw your men where there is no escape, and they will die rather than flee."

Sounds exactly like al-Qaida. What would it hurt to read the guerrillas' guidebook? Don't you owe it to us, and yourself? After all, as you've said to us, "I am a wartime president."

And the Master says, "He who knows self, but not the enemy, will suffer one defeat for every victory. "
John Lang is director of the journalism intern program at Washington College in Chestertown. He was chief White House correspondent for U.S. News & World Report during the Carter administration.

Good article, but I always thought where Bush blew it in Iraq could be summed up in another Sun Tzu quote, "When weak, appear strong and where strong, appear weak." Haven't we been doing just the opposite?
 
Arabs are killing Arabs at a rate vastly greater than they're killing us. Maybe he has read it after all

They (the enemy) seem to have been busy doing something other than attacking us.

One can only hope that the turmoil in the ME is keeping them busy over there and unable to get plans in place for over here.
 
The article is though provoking, but I find the argument a bit weak...
"In war, better take a state intact than destroy it."
Perhaps we're unclear on the difference between intact and destroyed. "Intact" refers to the state's means of production and the general welfare of its people with respect to a certain minimum standard of living. With a few notable exceptions, Iraq is largely intact. Basically, if the oilfields are mostly intact and the people don't face imminent starvation, Iraq is intact. "Destroyed" needs to be viewed in context. It doesn't mean collateral damage from a war, it means something more like "razed to the ground."
"Treat prisoners of war kindly, and care for them." How does that square with Guantanamo?
It doesn't. Not because Guantanamo is so bad, but because the meaning of the statement is so fundamentally different from what the writer thinks it is. We didn't hold mass executions of enemy prisoners. Rutheless Chinese warlords did. Our policy in Iraq was to hold POWs in a safe place, give them enough to eat, and send them home when the war ended. That's pretty darn good. No army in history has expended so much effort to ensure the safety and comfort of the enemy. A very few notable examples of what may or may not be "mistreatment" is all anybody talks about.
"Without knowing the plans of the feudal lords, you cannot form alliances."
This is the first one with some real truth to it. The "feudal lord" situation is a royal mess in a country where they're really only half a step above the medieval european feudal system. The fact is, however, that we're doing better than we were. More is needed, but we're not neglecting the situation altogether.
"When an army is confused and perplexed, the feudal princes will cause trouble. This creates chaos in the ranks and gives away victory."
...And again, the writer doesn't understand the meaning. Sun Tzu wasn't talking about organizing a country out of a chaotic situation, he was talking about fighting an offensive war using troops supplied by the emperor's lords.
"The place I intend to attack must not be known; if it is unknown, the enemy will have to reinforce many places ... but I shall attack few." And, "Throw your men where there is no escape, and they will die rather than flee."
And for the final time, Sun Tzu is about warfare, not nation building. This quote is out of context just like a general trying to start a government. I think it's safe to say that our soldiers' stomping of the Iraqi army demonstrates that we understand these principles. If you try to turn it around and say that terrorist types are applying this where security forces are not, you're comparing open warfare to insurrection. We all know that the comparison doesn't hold up.
Sounds exactly like al-Qaida. What would it hurt to read the guerrillas' guidebook?
Sun Tzu as a terrorist guidebook... that's a new one. Were I to run a terrorist organization, I would be far more interested in the teachings of Giap, Mao, and Guevara than information about how to identify an enemy's formation from its dust cloud. Maybe that's just me.

Journalists aren't historians and journalists aren't generals. This guy should stop masquerading.
 
Could we have done better? Always.

When your enemy is without uniforms, is willing to kill themselves to kill you, hides within civilians, is all over the world, has no rules which bind them, hold no nation, is backed and supported by nations and cares less what the media thinks, war becomes tougher to gauge, especially when you try to play by the rules, so to speak.

Armchair quarterbacking is always an easier position.

BTW, they behead prisoners, civilians prisoners at that. We use such techniques as dripping water on heads, making them stand nude and depriving them of sleep. We play loud music. We are so terrible. :rolleyes:
 
sun was a "master" or teacher (tzu) in ancient china, giving advice in a time of non-technical war. his teachings are somewhat irrelevant today in that they do not allow for the advances in technology in the intervening centuries. the teachings are still relevant in smaller scale operations, but do not work in the modern world in a large scale operation.

art of war is required reading in all of our military academies, and is only one of the "seven secret teachings". it is suitable for use by an agrarian society in which armies march on foot, and enemies abound. mao's "on protracted war" is based on these seven teachings, and was suitable for use by the north vietamese in the 50's -70's.

to a degree, i would say it is suitable for the china of today, where the armies are composed of people whose thought is in the path of kong-fu-si. technology seems to matter not in this land.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top