In the spirit of what Clausewitz called "friction" and I prefer to call
"slippage", demonstrating the danger of argument by analogy, I wonder if
military theorists would agree with the following conclusions of mine:

(1) The war someone thinks they're starting is usually not the war they're
actually starting.

(2) The war it all ends up as is usually not the original war.

--
tinmimus99@hotmail.com

smeeter 11 or maybe 12

mp 10

mhm 29x13

I AM JUST WEST OF THE MANURE PILE

< First known US military "wireless" communication

On Aug 18, 9:29 pm, mimus hotmail.com> wrote:

War of the minds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTnjsNTTz2Q

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:35:03 -0500, Tim Weaver wrote:

Clausewitz uses "friction" to refer to what WWII GIs referred to as
"SNAFU", eg yer troops arriving at one place and their munitions at
another . . . .

I think "slippage" works just as well if not better, even though its dam'
near an antonym.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:29:16 -0400, mimus wrote:

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most
vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in
which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:12:26 +0000, ZerkonX wrote:

War is not necessarily a racket.

Indeed, it may be a very just national response to national injury from an
international racket.

Such as a speculative commodity-bubble.

--
tinmimus99@hotmail.com