Military history Essay

You Military professionals must know aroundthing active strategy and evasive action and logistics, but in addition economics and politics and diplomacy and hi point. You must know everything you shadower know about army power, and you must also understand the limits of troops power. You must understand that few of the important problems of our epoch have in the final analysis, been solved by soldiers power aloneJohn F. Kennedy (Quoted from sweet the Peace the Requirement for Full-spectrum Operations by Chiargonlli and Michaelis (2005). Military history- on the button like whatsoever other stock of history- washbowl make or break you depending on how you use it.In US, for example, soldiers machine battles and struggles can be traced gumption to the 1700s when America was in the verge of attaining independence. From then on fightds, there have been a series of wars-mainly in their oppression and colonization efforts. In other parts of the public, multitude history also faced variable evolutions that take to the utilization of different forms and strategies. All these wars can however be collectively summarized with the first and second human beings wars which saw direct or indirect participation of most all countries from all over the earth (Gabel, 1985, p. 1-85).It is from studying such rich history that current military machine professionals argon able to have a relatively easy sentence when passing game about their vital schedules. These lessons can be in form of making improvements on already discovered fundamental concepts or alternatively, learning from past mistakes by avoiding them. loser to despoticly learn becomes with a bag-full of consequences more aptly put in the words of John Santayana Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. In giving his contribution to this immensely debated subject, RAF (2010, p. 152) rhetorically asks that If the study of history is so fraught with problems, and either so easy to raise vilify or difficult to overtake right, depending on ones view of the contents of the glass, why urticate at all? Well, so many answers-backed with evidences-have been advanced to support both ends of the debate. However, the focus of this paper is going to be on circumspectly highlighting the importance of studying military history-which most researchers amass as being vital-while partly highlighting its demerits.Before delving deep into why we should or should not study military history, it is natural that we start by mentioning the importance of history as an entity in itself. It is from getting this background fellowship that we will be able to ardently address the issue of military history. Most scholars tend to firmly draw their knowledge from historical data so they strongly commend the study of history in general. Others, on the other hand, either oppose it or support sparing use of historical sources.To the latter, history-more so the written type-is subject to citizenrys interpretations, understandings and opinions thus may be guide in studies since it is not very accurate or reliable (RAF, 2010, p. 153). For example, Presher (1901) describes his views on Americas abuse of noncombatants in a Filipino village. To some historians, the abuse described here was not really abuse but just an exercise of power. Both views might therefore be very confusing to people trying to get the real picture of what happened during that time. According to RAF (2010, p. 153), the literature studied in history Is inevitably extensive and, almost equally inevitably, much of it is impenetrable on first inspection. This may also deviate from what is really meant. RAF goes forward and advises that if we are to get the most accurate and precise representation of what happened, we need to study In breadth, attainment and arguably most importantly in a proper context. We should also ensure that we focus on many sources from authoritative individuals so as to get features rather than myths or fables which might be misleading (p.152-156). For instance, The recollective shadow of small-scale rock is a personal memoir of Daisy Bates which makes the writing authentic and presumable as opposed to other military history records which are narrated from the perspective of hearsays. fitting like any major area of human concern, the study of military history has its predefined language and concepts. Consequently, when studying military history, it is inherent that you familiarize yourself with jargons utilize here.For example, words like Strategic, operational, Tactical and Individual are used in military history to represent the realms of traditional history (Kagan (2006). It is also important to note that the studies should be conducted in an order. sloppy studies tend to confuse rather than perform the fundamental functions of studying military history. Having said that, what really are the advantages of studying military history? Elementar ily, RAF (2010, p. 157) documents that military history studies by military professionals offers pleasure, inspiration, information and pride to its students.Just by studying about the escapades of our historical heroes and villains in their military obligations, we are able to get entertainment since most of the stories are appalling. On top of that, we get informed from the in-depth descriptions of the war times. In With the Old Breed, maul (2001) grippingly describes the horrendous experiences at Peleliu and Okinawa while informing the readers of how difficult it was to survive during that time. In effect, someone studying the story gets informed and entertained at the same time. Murray & Sinnreich (2006, p. 32) assert that Military history helps provide the theoretical home for the science of war, and continues to do so even in an era of huge technological and social change. Gabel (1985, p. 3) exemplifies this by let looseing of clumsy, unreliable, difficult to operate fight tanks that provided a basis for the formation of better tanks to be used in other wars. In another example to show how one piece of history primed(p) theoretical foundation for another, Lupfer (1981, p. 8) says that The Germans did not win the First gentlemans gentleman War and their strategic conduct of the war was often flawed.Yet, much value can be derived from their development of tactical school of thought, for the Germans developed and applied sassy tactical doctrine impressively in 1917 and 1918. Their tactical changes were systematic and thorough, for these changes in doctrine directly touch subsequent battlefield success. In addition, studying military history provides a platform for referencing by military professionals. Lupfer (1981, p. 8) articulates of changes made by the army of Germany courtesy of armys high commandOHL. First, a antitank doctrine is adopted based on previous studies then later, an offensive strategy is adopted.In the long run, the German army s ucceeds in curbing their oppositions in the western fronts. According to Hanson (2007), military history also plays the irreplaceable role of reminding us happenings of the past and how the people back then contributed to our current state. The legion(predicate) documentations of the battles in the 1700s helps us not and to know the sacrifices endure for the achievement of independence but also reminds to be grateful and appreciative of all the villains who paved the way for the current independences in the U. S Moreover, military trainings only cover a small portion of the fundamental aspects involved in military education.Most scholars opinionate that military history helps in filling the knowledge void left by other forms of military education. Specifically, military history enhances practicability of military education which is crucial for the growth of military professionals. Hanson (2007) adds that Democratic citizenship requires knowledge of warand now, in the age of weapo ns of mass annihilation, more than ever. It is for this reason that institutions that focus on military history are late-but steadily- rising in many nations. This is also evident with the various movies, shows and songs that currently tend to incorporate aspects of military history. Examples include award-wining movies like Troy and 300 among many others. In spite of being hugely debated by many researchers, Hanson-and a handful of other scholars-further opinionate that military history teaches us that war is not needfully as bad as most people perceive it to be.So even though millions of people may get killed or innumerable properties may get destroyed, through war, we may get repose, freedom or even progress economically which is positive. In other words, war involves doing something bad with the hope that something true may come out of it. This can be exemplified with the outcomes of the vastly covered World wars (WWI and WWII) despite the numerous deaths and huge economic lo sses that resulted from them, the wars also pioneered dialogue which led to freedom and peace amongst the involved states.On the flipside, the study of war does not necessarily equate to advantages. Chiarelli and Michaelis (2005) support this statement by manifestation that A gun on every street corner, although visually appealing, provides only a short-term solution and does not equate to long-term security grounded in a democratic process. So in spite of peace being the ultimate target for wars, many wars end up with worse rivalry thus worsen the already bad situation.In instances where peace or freedom was not realized from the war, students who study the war may end up sucking in bad influence and negative lessons rather than the positive lessons that is targeted for them. It is also important to note that some people who study military history may get private information on some confidential issues which may pose a threat to those biography around them. An example is chemic al combinations of making a bomb landing in the hands of a terrorist. This poses a danger not only to people living around the terrorist but also on the country as a whole.Yet still, the study of military history can prove kind of costly and risky. So many people currently focus on technological advancements, discovery of bran-new drugs to solve the current diseases, making work easier through software among other things. I effect, very little time and attention is given to studying of past histories. The fact that history cannot be changed yet we can determine what becomes of our future makes even more people gutter the study of history while concentrating on current affairs as well as prospective forecasts.As a result, those who concentrate on studying military history mostly have to personally dig into their pockets so as to the studies as opposed to the millions of dollars donated daily towards new researches. In addition, those who study military history have to sometimes com e to terms with poor hospitality and hostility from their subjects. In Doughertys (2005, p. 1) interview of historian and free-lance source Robert Kaplan on his military research book Imperial Grunts The American Military on the Ground, Kaplan reveals that he had to tip soldiers through inhospitable and volatile areas just to get an interview from them.In his studies, he visited Yemen, Iraq, Ethiopia and Philippines- who at the time of the interviews were quite unwelcoming thus making it difficult for him to get substantial information. Dougherty (2005, p. 1) further exemplifies these acrid conditions by saying that in order for Kaplan to get valuable information from the soldiers, He immerses himself in their world, spending weeks and months living with soldiers in their quarters, joining their missions, eating, drinking, sweating, freezing, and sometimes starving, side-by-side with them. Adding on to the demerits, Kagan (2006) says that the complex nature of military language wh ich involves Unit sizes and nomenclature, acronyms and abbreviations, typologies of military action mechanism may sometimes prove too multifarious and confusing to normal students (those without professional military knowledge). Dougherty (2005, p. 3-6) gets Kaplan to talk about the complex language that existed between the military sergeants, generals and commanders in their communication. In some cases, it was even a must for the military officials to know and communicate in other foreign languages.At such points, some meanings maybe distorted to those recording as well as those studying the history based on the various communication syntaxes and rules that govern different regions. Lastly, the proliferation in ways of solving disputes has lessened the use of military personnel by most countries. As of today, most disputes are solved through dialogues, courts and round-table negotiations by world superpowers. In effect, the study of military is only done by a few people who rare ly dig deep into these annals of history.The many fundamental functions that military history provides are therefore slowly being corroded away by the ever increasing modern forms of conflict resolution. In conclusion, it is noted to say that military history plays an important role in preparing soldiers for wars. It may not necessarily gift them but it offers them insights on how their opponents fight, their strengths, weaknesses, previously successful combat methods, what they should avoid among other vital details which are invaluable before going to war.On the other hand, military history should be used meagrely so as to avoid complacency by soldiers based on overconfidence. Aptly put in the words of Henry Kissinger (1978) muniment is not, of course, a cookbook offering pretested recipes. It teaches by analogy, not maxims. It can bring in the consequences of actions in comparable situations, yet each generation must discover for itself what situations are in fact comparable . References Bates, D. (1987). T The long shadow of little rock.Fayetteville. P. 1 5, 43 76, 82 106. 64 pages Chiarelli, P. W. , & Michaelis, P. R. (July-August, 2005). Winning the peace The indispensableness for full-spectrum operations. Military Review, p. 1 17. Dougherty, E. (2005). Warriors for Good Interview with Robert Kaplan. Atlantic Unbound. Gabel, C. R. (1985). Seek, strike, and destroy U. S. army tank destroyer doctrine in World War II. Hanson, V. D. (2007). Why study war? CITY journal. Retrieved May 18, 2010, from http//www. city-journal.org/ hypertext mark-up language/17_3_military_history. html Kagan, F. W. (2006).Why military history matters. AEI Online. Retrieved May 18, 2010, from http//www. aei. org/outlook/24600 Kaplan, R. (October, 2005). Imperial Grunts With the army special forces in the Philippines and Afghanistanlaboratories of counterinsurgency. The Atlantic Monthly, p. 84 93. Lupfer, T. T. (1981). The dynamics of doctrine the change in German tactica l doctrine during the First World War. Murray, W. , & Sinnreich R. H. (2006).The past as prologue the importance of history to the military profession. Google Books. p. 32. Presher, F. (1999). Private Frederick Presher describes the U. S. Armys abuse of noncombatants in a Filipino village, 1901. Major Problems in American Military History. p. 230 231. RAF, P. W. G. (2005). XII. Why Study Military History? Defence Studies, 5(1), p. 151-164. Retrieved May 18, 2010, from http//dx. doi. org/10. 1080/14702430500097408 Sledge, E. B. (1981) With the Old Breed At Peleliu and Okinawa. P. 55 10.