On War (Carl von Clausewitz)

"War is a mere continuation of policy by other means."  So writes Prussian Carl von Clausewitz in his classic treatise On War.  Unfinished and published posthumously in the 1830s, this text steps through different aspects of war- definitions, the ultimate goals, strategy, tactics, political considerations, moral aspects, maintenance of the military force, and more.  Ultimately, he argues, war "is an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfill our will." Yet "If War is an ACT of force, it belongs necessarily also to the feelings. If it does not originate in the feelings, it REACTS, more or less, upon them, and the extent of this reaction depends not on the degree of civilisation, but upon the importance and duration of the interests involved."  And,

If our opponent is to be made to comply with our will, we must place him in a situation which is more oppressive to him than the sacrifice which we demand; but the disadvantages of this position must naturally not be of a transitory nature, at least in appearance, otherwise the enemy, instead of yielding, will hold out, in the prospect of a change for the better.

------------
This book caught me off-guard.  I thought this would be a "how to" book on war, with rules and tips/etc.; it was more about observations.  Carl was quick to point out that "Wars must differ in character according to the nature of the motives and circumstances from which they proceed."  He stated repeatedly that "science must become art" in many cases, and therefore the appeal to genius is necessary rather than rules.  I agree with him, but it also means much of this work can boil down to saying "war is difficult and formulas are impossible; it requires sound judgment."  In fact, he says basically this:

Great part of the information obtained in War is contradictory, a still greater part is false, and by far the greatest part is of a doubtful character. What is required of an officer is a certain power of discrimination, which only knowledge of men and things and good judgment can give.

The book was very difficult to read, and I'm not confident that I read the complete work (differing editions, presentations, and translations exist).  There were nuggets of valuable observations and keen insights, but these were, in places, overwhelmed by long and complex sentences, verbose digressions, and overall confusing prose. I'd read or skim as my attention held (or didn't); this text was unfinished at Clausewitz's death, and I can't help but think a better editing job might have produced a higher quality product.

Rating: B-