 |
|
Gen.Dragolen
|
|
Sir Ralph,
Can you add this old warhorse to the staff as well, please.
D.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DAVOUT
|
 |
AUERSTADT
Jun 2002 time: 05:20
|
|
The greatest interest of the War Academy and the Machiavelli Institute is to discuss military problems for one, and diplomatic issues for the other, without any liabilities to general politic. In mixing the two approachs in some threads, I am not sure that we make the analysis easier and clearer.
The case of a thread headed the War Academy associated with a minister is still worse, of course, since it endangered the independance of the Academy.
Any opinion ?
Last edited by DAVOUT on 05-08-2002 at 17:47
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001 time: 06:20
|
|
Welcome, Shiber.
quote: Originally posted by DAVOUT
The greatest interest of the War Academy and the Machiavelli Institute is to discuss military problems for one, and diplomatic issues for the other, without any liabilities to general politic. In mixing the two approachs in some threads, I am not sure that we make the analysis easier and clearer.
The case of a thread headed the War Academy associeted with a minister is still worth, of course, since it endangered the independance of the Academy.
Any opinion ? |
I include such threads written for two institutes in the thread library and set the other institute as a remark. I know, that in some matters political/diplomatic and military problems can't be separated. Since Clausewitz we know that the latter is the continuation of the former by other means. As long as it goes not entirely off topic, I think we can tolerate this.
Sometimes I see War academy threads being started, just to show some own contribution, although there are existing threads with a very similar topic. This I don't appreciate much. First, it blows up the thread library and leads to confusions. Second, it makes it harder to respond to them, because often I could answer to 3 questions in 3 threads with one single post.
So for instance, if there is a thread "Strategies for the upcoming French campaign", it is pointless to open a thread "Should we use galleys against France", "The way to approach for our troops" or "When shall we declare war on France", because the latter 3 threads are subtopics for the former and thus are just spam. Note, that I'm not talking about existing threads; the mentioned threads are hypothetical and are meant just for demonstration purposes. You get the point.
About the Academy losing independence because it's led by a minister: That is just a temporary issue. I won't run for an office anymore and will always remain independent. Since I was elected in the government, I was quite inactive, did not open a single War academy thread and only occasionally responded to others. I don't think that I cause the academy to be under governmental influence.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DAVOUT
|
 |
AUERSTADT
Jun 2002 time: 05:20
|
|
Sir Ralph,
Thank you for your comments.
I suggest the 3rd § be inserted in your top thread as guidelines for opening threads under the War Academy heading. It will help new comers, and possibly old ones !
I was not refering to you, since you have not personnally opened bi-headed War Academy threads, but to Road to France (Dpt. of Public Works. - Nothing personnal of course, it is a matter of principle).
As for the Clausewitz explanation, I am not sure it applies ; it answers the question why do we wage war, not how. IMHO, on subjects such as Contingencies Plans or Defensive case N/W, the Machiavelli Institute should provide the War Academy with the most probable diplomatic picture(s), and from that the War Academy would analyse the military consequences.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Robber Baron
|
 |
Commonwealth of Commonsense
Jun 2002 time: 00:20
|
|
I agree with Sir Ralph on the issue of cross-indexing threads as both War Academy and Machiavelli Institute. In some cases, the two spheres overlap, and there's not much harm, IMO, in inviting both communities/perspectives in on debate in those cases. Not much harm, and probably a great deal of good, in some cases. I certainly did not intend the Institute to encroach on the Academy's territory.
I suggested the creation of a seperate institution mainly because I was so impressed with the precision and thoughtfulness military planning took on as itcame under the umbrella of an "Academy" -- and because it seemed to me that there would be occasions and opportunities to discuss foreign affairs and/or diplomacy in contexts other than war with the same precision and thoughtfulness. War, as Clausewitz tells us, is an exercise of foreign policy, though only one kind of action, among many others.
And, for what it's worth, I have no problem with Sir Ralph serving in our government. I cannot see how it impaired the Academy's effectiveness, and hope it did not in any way inhibit Sir Ralph's participation in this forum.
[edit: added to clarify:] I also hope he feels free to hold office again in the future if he wants to. His expertise is invaluable to us.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
adaMada
|
 |
"The Iron" Stadium, Ubergorsk, Apolytonia (C3DG)
Mar 2000 time: 00:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DAVOUT
Sir Ralph,
Thank you for your comments.
I suggest the 3rd § be inserted in your top thread as guidelines for opening threads under the War Academy heading. It will help new comers, and possibly old ones !
I was not refering to you, since you have not personnally opened bi-headed War Academy threads, but to Road to France (Dpt. of Public Works. - Nothing personnal of course, it is a matter of principle).
As for the Clausewitz explanation, I am not sure it applies ; it answers the question why do we wage war, not how. IMHO, on subjects such as Contingencies Plans or Defensive case N/W, the Machiavelli Institute should provide the War Academy with the most probable diplomatic picture(s), and from that the War Academy would analyse the military consequences. |
I understand what you mean about some things not being combined, but think that others should be... I think that all military plans should also have a diplomatic analysis thread, and it seems easier to combine them into one thread at times.
For example, "Defensive Case N/W" -- I started that thread, and I opted for having one thread for both War plans and diplomatic options; I thought of making two threads on the subject, but didn't want to overrun people with threads on the topic (if nothing else, taking up valuable front-page space) . Perhaps the leaders of the War academy and the Machiavelli Institute could deside what the best way to handle situations like that?
-- adaMada
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|