What are the different theories of war?

Question

Pls include referrences where you got the information

Example theories are marxist theories

Answer 1

WARS are needed as a natural part of human evolution. When you look at war from a long-range perspective, it becomes clear that, as destructive as wars are, their very destructiveness has served as the primary force for the evolution of the human race. By mercilessly elimnating those who were unable to survive in the theater of war, wars resulted in a constant upgrading of both the physiological and intellectual acuity of man.

Although many bright people perish in wars, the preponderance of the casualties occur among people with the limited intellectual capacity to understand the mechanics of wars and who are thus unable to avoid becoming casualties.

Who would seriosly dispute the fact that smart people have higher living standards than intellectually less endowed persons do? War elimnates the intellectually less fit and thus, in the end, raises the average intelligence and the living standards of society as a whole.

Throughout the ages, evolution took advantage of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse, war, natural disasters, disease and famine.

If we succeed in eliminating armies and war, we are also eliminating war in its capacity as a powerful contributor to evolution by keeping the world population in check. We are now at 6 billion humans, scientific projections of growth predict 10 billion within 50 years...mostly in under developed countries. Humanity will reach the limits of available resources at 9-12 billion..this is not sustainable.

We can only speculate as to which path evolution will take in reducing the world from 10 to 3 billion. A battle for resources will favor those with higher levels of intelligence and rationality. Evolution never receds to irrationality, superstition and stupidity.

Answer 2

Well, there is a wealth of information online, I'm sure, but here's my theory: When two entities have two opposing views on a matter, and through negotiation (if both sides are willing to talk), no comprimise can be accomplished, there are basically two options: 1- flip a coin, or 2- fight until one entity is defeated, or concedes the opposing entity's point.
So there's something for ya!

Answer 3

The basic theory of Grand Strategy is to politically outmaneuver your opponent so you don't have to fight, such as Hitler's conquest of the Rhineland, Austria, & the Sudetanland. - Sun Tzu, circa 300 BC

The basic theory of Strategy is to have more force at the critical point than your opponent. This does not mean sending everything you can to that point, but engaging you opponent in such places necessary to enable you to be strongest at the critical point. The key is knowing the critical point. - Clauswitz, circa 1850 (The predominant military theory of the day)

Operationally the idea is to take up a good defensive position and force your opponent to attack you there.

Tactically the idea is to attack your opponent's weakness with your strength and force him to attack your strength with his weakness. - Sun Tzu.

Sun Tzu is probably the easiest Military Theorist to read (if you have a good translation). Clauswitz is very hard to read and understand. I recommend reading Archer Jones & B.H. Liddell-Hart.

Answer 4

I recall some psychologist's theory that men, as hunters, had to go off to war every generation in order to satisfy their bloodlust.

I personally thought that was a load of crap.

Answer 5

efw, is a nit wit. All field grade officers are college graduates. If not from one of the Acadmys are ROTC. they go to one of the war colleges. So I guess if an offericer gets blown up by an IED it was his own fault for being stupid. Get a clue you moron!

Answer 6

Territory, hate , greed , religion, disagreements etc.

Answer 7

In war, there are no winners. ME.

Answer 8

THEORIES ? THE MAJOR PROBLEMS ARE GREED , HATE , AND THE MISINTERPRETATION OF RELIGION.....

Answer 9

Your question is incomplete.

Reply hazy--try again later.