[net.politics] Again The Art of War

ksf@security.UUCP (Keith S. Fung) (12/13/83)

Believe it or not, This was sent by mail, by using the "r" option, but it
gagged. Therefore here it is for the net to read.

----- Mail saved at Tue Dec 13 09:44:25 1983
To: grunwald@uiuccsb.UUCP
Subject: Re: Re: Asian History - (nf)
References: <4421@uiucdcs.UUCP>
I would suggest that you re-read The Art of War. War is no sport, it is done for the protection of or expansion of the state. It was never meant to be taken likely (as it appears war is taken now). War, tactics, and strategy(sp?) were 
required learning by all leaders of the military. It was paramount, however, to
win a war was good, but to do it with the LEAST amount of force was the goal to
win the war. A sobering note: Soviet military acadamies make The Art of War a
manditory book that MUST be learned by heart. WESTERN military leaders had best
do the same. THERE IS GREAT KNOWLEGE in this book, as there are in others that
ancient Chinese have put down. 
	An important note is that there is a large difference in just reading, and from learning. (sorry to divert from the original topic, but as one who is
extremely interested in tactical and stategic warfare I don't like seeing one ofmy "bibles" being misinterpreted.)
								Keith Fung
								Mitre
							....!linus!security!ksf