Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

philknox

Members2
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    33

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

philknox's Achievements

Landsmen

Landsmen (1/13)

39

Reputation

  1. philknox
    I have the transaction id and key so why I am being asked to purchase?
  2. philknox
    I am having the same problem and pc specs are good.
  3. philknox
    The German Army, unlike Fuller and Liddell Hart, always favored the destruction of the enemy in encirclement battles. Command paralysis was never a primary goal. German practice was firmly rooted in Clausewitz.
  4. philknox
    For the record, Liddell Hart has been knocked down several notches of late. His "indirect approach" was really nothing new. If you are really interested in "blitzkrieg" and German Military history particularly relating to armor. I would read this article "Abuses of German Military History" by Daniel Hughes. 250.pdf
  5. philknox
    I would add him.
  6. philknox
    You are correct. My problem with Blight, Goodwin etc is that they are expecting too much of the people of the 19th Century.
  7. philknox
    As far as Grant supporting black equality, we must also consider that many of his closest military colleagues did not view blacks as being equal and Grant did nothing about it. Sherman, Sheridan, John Gibbon, Torbert, Wilson, Miles, Upton, etc did not agree with blacks being equal. For every Howard or Pope, Army abolitionists among the Union officer corps I can find many more that held different points of view.
  8. philknox
    I would add to vengeance the motivation of party politics and the political patronage that went with it. Men like Stevens, Sumner, Davis and Chandler wanted to bury the Democrat Party forever. As far as Frederick Douglass, outside of the intelligentsia he was not that popular. He just wasn't that influential, particularly during Reconstruction, and had no real influence to the average American white. I am not arguing counter-factual history when Reconstruction ended with the pre-existing social orders in place North and South. Reconstruction would not have ended without the support of Northern whites.
  9. philknox
    There are no real modern counterparts to Clausewitz. Most strategists today are specialists in certain fields that relate to geo-politics/military science. However, I would suggest Colin S. Gray and Antulio Echevarria, Alan Millett, Christopher Bassford and the late Russell Weigley and Trevor DuPuy would be good places to start. For the Napoleonic Period I would start with Gunther Rothenberg. Civil War a much bigger list based on the topic- Donald Stoker, Herman Hattaway, Archer Jones, Richard Beringer, Steven Woodworth, Ethan Rafuse, Richard McMurry, Mark Grimsley, Joseph Harsh, Brooks Simpson and Albert Castel. This is not all inclusive there are more, but these are good places to go to. I would also pay attention to Jennifer Murray at UVA Wise she is an up and coming military historian. For World Two- Dennis Showalter, David Glantz, Jonathon House, Chris Lawrence, Niklas Zetterling, David Stahel, Karl Heinz Freiser and Rolf Dieter-Muller come to mind of late.
  10. philknox
    With Jomini you will start to see the concepts of interior lines, concentration in time and space and other geometrical approaches to military tactics.
  11. philknox
    If you want to understand Civil War tactics it is best to study Baron Jomini’s The Art of War, as study that many Civil War officers were familiar. Sun Tzu was unknown to the West during this time period and its Oriental mysticism would have been unpopular. This may surprise many but Sun Tzu is NOT given much credence in higher professional military circles. Sun Tzu is considered too much of military fantasy and a work that ignores human nature to be of much use. See Michael I. Handel’s Masters of War: Classical Strategic Thought for more commentary on this subject. Clausewitz is given much greater authority today. Both Sun Tzu are too formulaic and didactic while Clausewitz is dialectic. If you want to understand Civil War tactics I recommend the following works Brent Nosworthy’s The Bloody Crucible of Courage: Fighting Methods and Combat Experience of the Civil War Paddy Griffith’s Battle Tactics of the Civil War Earl Hess’s Civil War Infantry Tactics: Training, Combat, and Small-Unit Effectiveness and Civil War Logistics: A Study of Military Transportation The latter is a pre-order, but it will be an excellent work. I have seen the manuscript. For the record, I am a retired US Army Lt. Col., and graduate and lecturer at the US Army War College, at Carlisle.
  12. philknox
    Gary Gallagher has the best books on this topic of late, with the Union War and the Confederate War.
  13. philknox
    This is a power point of a class I did on Reconstruction. The Class was on the Civil War, but I divided into phases, the Antebellum Period, Civil War, and Reconstruction. Reconstruction.pptx
  14. philknox
    There is no evidence that American society wanted racial reform, and much more to suggest otherwise. Racial equality would have been a non-starter in any white nation state during the time period.
  15. philknox
    Yes they did. We must also keep in mind that many of what would become Jim Crow laws started in the North, and continued well into the 20th Century.
×
×
  • Create New...