# Relevance of Clausewitz's "On War"
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [June 21, 2004, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424 "2004-06-21T08:17:01Z")
**Posts on this page:** 7
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/1 "2004-06-21T08:17:01Z")
Is Clausewitz’s _On War_ still relevant regarding modern warfare and military strategy?
WRS
---
### Author:  [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/2 "2004-06-21T09:54:03Z")
Sort of like Freud. any things he said were wrong, but he was the first person to think (and write) about the subject in a serious way.
VonC rejected old-fashioned notions like “The Key to the Country” and pointed us toward (but did not specifically articulate) the modern force-oriented strategy. He noted for the first time the tendency of war towards totality. He did this noting the effect tents (of all things) had on early-modern European warfare.
He did not comment too heavily upon the increase of mobility that marked the post-Napoleonic period (although he certainly saw the first clues in is own lifetime.
So, a smart cookie, he set us on the path to clear (or at least clearer) thinking on the subject, but not an all-seeing prophet.
---
### Author:  [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/3 "2004-06-21T15:43:44Z")
If I wanted to read about modern military strategy, tactics - to learn about modern warfare, in general - what book would be best? Wars fought today are very different from how they were fought decades ago. What are today’s concerns, expectations, and methods?
I should state that it should be a non-biased book, neither pro-war nor anti-war.
WRS
---
### Author:  [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/4 "2004-06-21T16:14:40Z")
Gee that is a tough one.
VonC is a tough read (he died before publication and so he was never able to edit the manuscript.)
The standard U.S. Army Publication is FM 100-1 Operations (1996 version) is an excellent primer. However (and oddly) I have been unable to find it online. MCWP 3-1 Ground Combat Operations is a lower-level book, and in truth I have not read it.
On the other hand, you can download it at
[https://www.doctrine.usmc.mil/htm/doc5.htm](https://www.doctrine.usmc.mil/htm/doc5.htm)
---
### Author:  [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/5 "2004-06-21T16:20:45Z")
> [@Paul in Saudi](#):
>
> [https://www.doctrine.usmc.mil/htm/doc5.htm](https://www.doctrine.usmc.mil/htm/doc5.htm)
Damn, that’s a great link.
---
### Author:  [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/6 "2004-06-21T16:28:42Z")
My pleasure. I still like FM100-1 better.
---
### Author:  [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)
#### Post date: [June 21, 2004, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relevance-of-clausewitzs-on-war/251424/7 "2004-06-21T17:02:34Z")
I believe I may have a copy. It used to be online, but… since 9/11 it vanished. I have a decent stash of FMs, actually.