0
What were significant differences between military theorists Clausewitz and Johmini?
ChuckSiata
Both military theorists, Clausewitz and Johmini wrote about the Napoleonic era wars, their publications contained significant differences. Clausewitz is almost in a metaphysical mode in his publication of ON War. He assumes the reader is already familiar with Henri Johmini. Johmini expressed his view on the geometrical rules for warfare. With that said, perhaps the most significant differences between them were their views on the relative power of offensive and defense. Clausewitz clearly emphasizes the power of tactical defense, while Johmini leans toward tactical offensives.
Wiki User
∙ 7y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What are reasons that early nineteenth military theorists Jomini and Clausewitz had similar ideas?
The primary early 19th century military theorists Henri Johmini and Carl von Clausewitz had similar but not exactly the same ideas on military strategies and tactics. Their similarity comes from the fact that both of them had a keen interest in the military campaign of Frederick the Great. Also, each had personal experiences in the Napoleonic War Era. And, lastly, they learned from each other by reading each other's books.
What were the broad ideas by military theorist Carl von Clausewitz concerning the elements that drive most wars?
In his book called On War, Carl von Clausewitz presents his theory that there are three forces that drive a war. The form a trinity he calls chance, passion, and rationality. This should not be confused with his ideas on war itself. Here in his trinity he speaks in very broad terms.
What caused Lenin to study the works of military theorist Carl von Clausewitz?
Lenin turned to the works of military theorist Carl Von Clausewitz in 1915. Lenin was not that interested in military strategy or tactics. What many people overlook is that Clausewitz paid attention to war time politics and the role of warfare in relation to the masses. In some of Lenin's writings he copied verbatim some of Clausewitz's observations on how the politics of a nation interacted with wars.
What did military theorist Carl Von Clausewitz advise to armies that were unable to win decisive battles against their enemies?
To win a decisive war, military theorist Carl Von Clausewitz believed that this is best accomplished by destroying the enemy's army. He did make mention that the capture of the enemy's capital city was important, however, that city had to be a significant military target and lose many of its defenders in the combat.
How did military theorist Carl Von Clausewitz define the total defeat of an enemy?
In its most basic form, Carl Von Clausewitz defined the total defeat of an enemy as military operations that were not necessarily political, although the defeat of the enemy would have political effects. But before the political ramifications were realized, Clausewitz defined total victory as the destruction of the enemy's armies and the conquest of its territory.
What sources did military theorists Henri Jomini and Carl Von Clausewitz use to formulate their publications on the art and science of war?
Henri Jomini and Carl Von Clausewitz were prominent military thinkers in the 19th century. Much of their writings were based on the wars fought by Napoleon and Frederick the Great. Both Jomini and Clausewitz were first hand witnesses to the military exploits of the aforementioned generals.
What are reasons that early nineteenth military theorists Jomini and Clausewitz had similar ideas?
The primary early 19th century military theorists Henri Johmini and Carl von Clausewitz had similar but not exactly the same ideas on military strategies and tactics. Their similarity comes from the fact that both of them had a keen interest in the military campaign of Frederick the Great. Also, each had personal experiences in the Napoleonic War Era. And, lastly, they learned from each other by reading each other's books.
What key factor was absent from the works of military theorists Clausewitz and Johmini?
After the Union victory at the Battle of Shiloh, General Halleck made a remarkable 150 mile advance into Confederate territory. Based on several negative factors such as advancing within the enemy's homeland, neither military theorists Clausewitz or Johmini never would have believed a rapid advance would be possible. These men failed to take into consideration the fact that by using waterways and gunboats, Halleck was able to make a rapid advance.
What were the broad ideas by military theorist Carl von Clausewitz concerning the elements that drive most wars?
In his book called On War, Carl von Clausewitz presents his theory that there are three forces that drive a war. The form a trinity he calls chance, passion, and rationality. This should not be confused with his ideas on war itself. Here in his trinity he speaks in very broad terms.
What is the relevance of Clausewitz for contemporary military professionals?
The relevance of Carl Von Clausewitz's "Principles of War" for contemporary military professionals is that it deals with the mind of man at war and not the weapons of war.
What can be said about political appointments to military positions according to theorists Jomini and Clausewitz?
Perhaps the two most referred to military authorities on 19th Century warfare, Henri Jomini and Carl von Clausewitz had slightly different views on political appointments to generalships that may apply to the US Civil War. Jomini studied the US Civil War and he opposed political appointments that both presidents Lincoln and Davis made. Some readers of both military theorists claim that Clausewitz would have understood it based on his argument that policy creates war, and the US Civil War was the result of political policies. There was, however, agreement between these theorists on this: That generals were made not born. There was nothing to prevent a politician, with the necessary attributes and study of warfare to become a capable general. US Civil War political appointees however, were not much inclined to study warfare before engaging the enemy.
What is the US Army's policy on the Napoleonic Era war strategies of such military theorists as Carl von Clausewitz?
As with most nations' military, strategies and tactics in any ongoing conflict are not publicized, however, observers can make assessments as they see military operations unfold. And, Army doctrines can be ignored if the circumstances do not fit doctrine. It can be said however, that military students and their professors discounted Carl Von Clausewitz until 1984. Curriculum changes however, can be dull to most people. With that said, US Army officers discuss the works of Clausewitz and his ideas on culminating points and centers of gravity with serious thought, both for historical purposes and where they may be applied to future military conflicts. They. however, are not as of yet, Army doctrines.
What is a major difference between the published works on warfare of Carl Von Clausewitz and Henri Johmini?
One major difference between Carl Von Clausewitz and Henri Johmini is the fact that Clausewitz writes more on how politics and military strategies are linked. Johmini tends to shy away from this angle of warfare and is more concerned with purely military tactics and strategy. As an aside, Vladimir Lenin studied Clausewitz because Clausewitz speaks to what Lenin wanted to learn. That being how military strategies and political goals are inter related.
What caused Lenin to study the works of military theorist Carl von Clausewitz?
Lenin turned to the works of military theorist Carl Von Clausewitz in 1915. Lenin was not that interested in military strategy or tactics. What many people overlook is that Clausewitz paid attention to war time politics and the role of warfare in relation to the masses. In some of Lenin's writings he copied verbatim some of Clausewitz's observations on how the politics of a nation interacted with wars.
What sources did military theorists Henri Jomini and Carl Von Clausewitz use to formulate their works?
Both of them based their works on the experience made fighting during the Napoleonic wars and by reading Napoleon's writings. Indeed ,only Clausewitz was able. to catch the "living gist", the "significance" implied in the experience made by the great leader, without reduce it in a series of pedantic "rules", good for all kind of purposes.
What major ancient battle did the military genius Clausewitz overlook?
American revolution
Would military theorists have predicted that General Sherman's methods of warfare would defeat the Confederacy?
Historians familiar with the leading military theorists of the early 19th century believe that Union General Sherman's style of a scourged earth warfare would not convince theorists such as Carl Von Clausewitz or Henri Jomini that this could defeat the South. For them the South encompassed an area too large for the Union to conquer with the forces the Union made available, especially when opposed by a strong national resistance. It should be noted that these are opinions of certain, not all US Civil War historians.
