Amid an overwhelming flood of information—much of it propaganda, and very little of it reliable—and a news cycle with the memory of a goldfish, trying to make sense of the U.S. and Israel’s war on Iran can be exhausting. To resist this imposed immediacy, perhaps one of the oldest treatises on war can still offer some guidance.
One of the beauties of the internet—and also one of its nightmares—is that no angle remains unexplored when it comes to the news. There is never a shortage of explanations or theories about why events happen and what their consequences might be. The war on Iran is no different. Yet the “fog of war” is real, and today we must also contend with a “fog of information,” deliberately thickened during times of conflict.
To cut through that informational fog, it may be useful to step back and examine present events through the eyes of the past. Sun Tzu’s The Art of War may still have something to say about the direction this conflict could take.
In the first chapter, Sun Tzu explains that the outcome of a war can be anticipated through two main considerations: which side has planned and prepared more effectively, and which side has fulfilled the necessary conditions for victory.
“Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.”
There are some indications that the United States may have been preparing for a war against Iran for several months. The “12 Days War” was interpreted by many observers as a prelude. In December 2025, the U.S. moved more than 1,000 Paveway guided bomb kits from Osan Air Base in Korea back to the United States. In January 2026, it raided Venezuela and abducted its president, an action that some analysts interpret as an attempt to secure oil supplies before potential disruptions in the Arabian Gulf.
However, at the same time, there are signs that Washington may not have been fully prepared. The Trump administration failed to refill the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and air defenses in the region appear insufficient for a prolonged campaign against Iran. Moreover, the overall strategic objective of the war remains unclear.
It could also be argued that the U.S. has contemplated war with Iran since at least 2001, when General Wesley Clark stated that he had been shown a plan by the Bush administration to attack seven countries in five years. Yet even if this claim is accurate, it represents a broad geopolitical strategy rather than a concrete operational war plan—and recent history in Iraq shows how poorly such plans can unfold.
Iran, on the other hand, has arguably been preparing for such a conflict since the 1979 revolution. More specifically, for the particular scenario, since at least 2003, when IRGC Commander General Mohammad Ali Jafari, after seeing Saddam’s collapse, reorganized Iran’s defense structure and developed the “Mosaic Doctrine” (or Mosaic Defense) to ensure regime survival against a militarily superior opponent such as the United States. The doctrine combines a decentralized command with conventional forces and asymmetric tactics involving the Basij militia, missile systems, and drone warfare—precisely the kind of strategy we are seeing today.
According to Sun Tzu’s first parameter—which side has prepared and planned more effectively—it could be argued that Iran currently holds the advantage. This assessment may also apply to Israel, which revealed much of its strategy during the previous round of fighting in June, after which Iran dismantled Israel’s intelligence network inside the country. Israel’s apparent strategy has largely been to draw the United States directly into the conflict, hoping that the sheer weight of American firepower would prove decisive. So far, that does not appear to be the case.
Sun Tzu also argues that when assessing the prospects of war, one must consider five constant factors: (1) The Moral Law (2) Heaven (3) Earth (4) The Commander (5) Method and Discipline. To evaluate these factors, he proposes seven guiding questions:
“(1) Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the Moral law? (2) Which of the two generals has most ability? (3) With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and Earth? (4) On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced? (5) Which army is stronger? (6) On which side are officers and men more highly trained? (7) In which army is there the greater constancy both in reward and punishment? By means of these seven considerations I can forecast victory or defeat.”
Let us briefly examine each of these questions.
The Moral Law
The first question asks: which sovereign is most aligned with the moral law? Some commentators interpret this as the degree to which a ruler is in harmony with the population. In modern terms, it might refer to whether the government shares a common worldview with its citizens and whether the public believes in the legitimacy of the war.
In the United States, public approval of the war stands at only 27%, while 43% oppose it and 29% remain uncertain. Comparable polling data from Iran is not readily available, but large demonstrations in support of the government and the new Supreme Leader have been reported despite ongoing bombardment.
Meanwhile, the MAGA movement—President Trump’s core political base—appears deeply divided, with influential figures such as Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon openly opposing the war.
Public trust in the U.S. government has also declined significantly over time. According to Pew Research, around 70% of Americans trusted the federal government in the 1950s; today that figure has fallen to roughly 30%. Gallup reported in 2021 that approximately 59% of Iranians supported their government, though such statistics should be interpreted cautiously.
More importantly, around 90% of Iran’s population identifies with the Shia branch of Islam, which creates a shared ideological framework between the political leadership and much of the population. In the United States, by contrast, about 62% identify as Christian, but the religious landscape is fragmented across numerous denominations with divergent worldviews (this also exists in Iran, but it could be argued that not as much as in the U.S.)
In Israel, 93% of Jewish Israelis reportedly support the war with Iran, according to recent polling. While this suggests strong domestic backing, Israel cannot sustain the conflict without U.S. support, which limits the strategic significance of that consensus.
Overall, when each government is considered individually, Iran appears to perform better according to Sun Tzu’s first criterion.
The Commander
The second question concerns which general has the greater ability. For the sake of comparison, let us assume that U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth represents the highest military authority on the American side, while Ahmad Vahidi—recently appointed commander of the IRGC—serves as Iran’s senior operational military figure beneath the Supreme Leader.
Ahmad Vahidi is a product of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from its earliest days in the late 1970s. He rose through the ranks during the Iran-Iraq War, holding key intelligence and command positions. Iranian state media reports that he led the elite Quds Force from 1988 to 1997. He later served as defense minister under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and interior minister under President Ebrahim Raisi, leaving office in 2024.
Pete Hegseth, by contrast, graduated from Princeton, served in the U.S. Army for 16 years with deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, and later became a prominent television commentator and media personality.
If forced to compare the two purely in terms of military career trajectory, one might reasonably argue that Vahidi possesses deeper strategic experience within a state military structure.
Heaven and Earth
The third question concerns the advantages derived from “Heaven and Earth,” which Sun Tzu describes as factors such as timing, seasons, geography, distances, terrain, and logistical conditions.
In a short and intense conflict dominated by airpower, these factors might initially favor the United States and Israel. However, in a prolonged conflict, especially one shaped by logistics and geography, the advantage shifts toward Iran.
This is particularly true when considering the economic dimension of the war. Both the material costs of prolonged operations and the potential disruption to international trade could affect the United States and Israel more severely than Iran, whose economy has already adapted to decades of sanctions and isolation.
Method and Discipline
The remaining questions—discipline, strength of the army, training of officers and soldiers, and consistency of reward and punishment—fall under Sun Tzu’s fifth factor: method and discipline. Sun Tzu explains that this includes the organization of the army, the hierarchy of command, the maintenance of supply lines, and the control of military expenditure.
Regarding supply and economic sustainability, one could argue that Iran again holds certain advantages. Because it is defending its own territory, logistics are inherently simpler. Meanwhile, the asymmetrical strategy employed by Iran may impose significant economic costs on both the United States and Israel, whose economies are more dependent on global trade networks.
The Strait of Hormuz provides a clear example. Even without deploying a powerful navy, Iran could potentially disrupt maritime traffic using relatively inexpensive sea drones, creating serious challenges for the U.S. Navy in the confined waters of the Gulf. This explains why proposals to escort tankers have so far been rejected.
I am by no means a military expert, and it would be difficult for me to answer definitively the remaining questions: which side enforces discipline more effectively, which army is better trained, and which maintains more consistent systems of reward and punishment.
However, it is plausible that the Iranian military might compare more favorably with the U.S. military than is often assumed, particularly outside elite American units.
Which Army Is Stronger?
The final question is which army is stronger. In purely conventional terms, the United States clearly holds the advantage. Yet when this factor is weighed alongside all the others, it may not be decisive in this particular conflict.
Some might argue that Sun Tzu’s principles are outdated, given the radically different nature of modern warfare. But are they really?
The Ramadan War suggests that many of his insights remain relevant.
32 comments
Comments are closed.
This is a necessary and accurate analysis.
Iran defends their country. The USA and Israel?
Amid the daily deluge of detailed and conflicting news reports, it’s a pleasure to take a few steps back and ponder what’s going on through the lens of Sun Tzu.
Early in my second year of MBA school, ‘The Art of War’ went viral in our class. I don’t quite know why; I think it was mentioned in one of our case studies, and then it happened to be on sale at a local bookstore, and then one of our more vocal classmates bought it and began quoting it in class discussions about business matters, etc., and so it was purchased and passed around en masse. Anyway by the end of the term, pretty much all of us had read it (or at least pretended to: it’s a short book anyway) and were trying to work it into our class comments (on which we were graded, so I guess we hoped that quoting a long-demised Chinese sage would boost our standing in the eyes of the professors).
During one lively discussion, a classmate opined that catching one’s business competitors by surprise is a brilliant tactic (quoting Sun Tzu, of course). To which another classmate pointed out that in an oligopolistic business environment (which was and remains pretty much the norm in our globalized corporate world), catching your powerful competitors totally by surprise is a terrible idea, fraught with disastrous consequences for both of you. It’s far more important to be reasonably predictable and signal your intentions (and capabilities) clearly, in order to avoid misunderstandings and unnecessary conflicts. After all, there’s lots of money to be made if only we can all agree on the basic rules of play.
I think there’s a lot of timeless wisdom in Sun Tzu, but much of it is hidden away and visible only after careful reflection (perhaps one reason why he kept his book so short). Watching the Persians (and the Russians too, for that matter) conduct a war can be maddeningly frustrating to the western mentality: why don’t the Ayatollahs just lob all of their missiles onto Tel Aviv and wreck the place (and Dimona too!), and why doesn’t Putin just turn Bankova into molten glass (and Paris and London too, while he’s at it)? I think Sun Tzu would appreciate that the Persians and their friends in Russia and China are playing a longer game, are interested in long-term prosperity (if necessary even in cooperation with their rival powers in the west), and would like to avoid mutual annihilation. Sun Tzu would not have recognized our modern technology, but I’m sure a man of his intellect would have recognized the basic principles at stake.
Kudos again to NC (and its fine commentariat) for the brilliant coverage of ongoing events. For those who have not read the book in full, Curro has kindly embedded a link up above in the fourth paragraph (Sun Tzu is no longer under copyright!).
Good story and commentary! Thanks
“Sun Tzu would appreciate that the Persians and their friends in Russia and China are playing a longer game, are interested in long-term prosperity (if necessary even in cooperation with their rival powers in the west), and would like to avoid mutual annihilation.”
Alas, we have the Rapture/Armageddon freaks in high places on the U.S./Zionist side. I had myself a good laugh the other day when Bolton decried the Iranian leadership as “religious fanatics”. Has he looked in a mirror lately?
That would be the first time anyone recognizes a fanatic in the mirror.
Everyone thinks they’re reasonable (unless they are in rage and can’t think, but that doesn’t matter here), even fanatics. If anyone isn’t reasonable, well, it’s always someone else.
One need to get rid of these people before any progress can be made.
Personally I think Sun Tzu (and game theory!) are basically being sold fraudulently. They are useful and can provide interesting insights, but are too sparse to generate anything beyond very basic “predictions.” If people claim that these very broad frameworks can generate actionable “predictions” without knowing a lot of actual details, I’d suspect snake oil salesmen.
I read The Art of War on a trip years ago. My impression is that it is most useful when commanding an ancient Chinese army, and second most useful in a modern business environment when trying to impress people who are impressed with someone’s ability to read a short book :)
That said, it was in this article used in an interesting way to highlight strenghts and weaknesses.
Mr. Johnstone you hit the nail on its head “why don’t the Ayatollahs just lob all of their missiles onto Tel Aviv and wreck the place (and Dimona too!), and why doesn’t Putin just turn Bankova into molten glass (and Paris and London too, while he’s at it)?” The western mind set is colonial which is more or less “Shock and Awe” philosophy, that means kill as many civilians as you can by lobbing bombs from a safe distance. Where as the Persians don’t target civilians despite all the propaganda we see in our media. If you noticed the Persians initially targeted radar stations and other military installations which are eyes and back bone of the US operations. Where as US/Israel targeted the civilian leaders, schools etc and may be some military installations. True both sides prepared for the war in their own way but which will be more successful but the initial results favor the Persians in my opinion. Thanks
“which side enforces discipline more effectively, which army is better trained, and which maintains more consistent systems of reward and punishment.”
I would argue this includes the world-class corruption evident in the upper-level US military revolving door with the MICC (and the MIC is a critical part of the military). This leads to useless weapons that have been getting Ukrainians killed by the score.
For example, US and Israel planning was based on effective (and sufficient) air defenses, which they do not have because of corruption.
Sun Tzu also said: “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Listening to Hegseth – he clearly knows nothing about either. Listening to Iran (and watching its strategy unfold), they seem to know both very well.
I really enjoyed reading this thoughtful article.
Victor Mair, in my favorite translation of The Art of War, translates that same passage thusly:
I would suggest not confusing “strength” with “size.” Smaller armies can often be “stronger” than ones with greater numbers.
I would also, since Sun Tzu is rightly on the table, add in his quote about, “If you know the enemy, and you know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.” However, the quote goes on to describe only knowing yourself or the opponent (50% win chance), and the result of knowing neither yourself nor your opponent (100% loss chance).
I would suggest that the US and Israel know neither themselves, nor Iran,* and that the result is preordained – it’s just a question of what the final specifics of the loss will look like.
*whereas Iran knows both itself and its opponents…
Mix racism, political intent, careerism in the pentagon, and AIPAC bribery. Leads to shoddy intelligence.
US knows neither itself nor Iran. In Vietnam US did not admit it own and allies’ deficits. US got away with it in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Of note, CJCS Caine tried to caution the bosses!
I still say USA win this. Just day ago iran came out with with the idea all countries who throw usa embassy out can pass Hormuz i am sorry but that is a stupid stunt. Another thing is letting Azerbaijan aid in who are working with Israel. Just couple day before they had thousands of troops ready to invade Iran because of false flag, now they want to send aid in come on guys,there is more here than aid. I am on Iran side but when it come war with USA weakness are not tolerated
I don’t think it is stupid. It’s not going to actually happen, but it was a low cost way of telling populations round the world to be mad at the US and their own governments.
The United States does not know its enemy and consistently lies to itself.
John T Reed has written extensively about the lack of integrity in the US Army and his articles about Stanley McChrystal and the death of Pat Tillman are well worth reading.
Dishonesty is a requirement to reach flag rank in the US Military.
Senior officers in the IRGC for the most part have integrity, Senior Officers in the US Military do not.
Advantage Iran and not by a small amount.
Thanks for the article and the comments above.
I think the experience of the Roman’s under Crassus rhymes surprisingly here, as discussed earlier today at the end of Kevin Kirk’s “Armageddon Now! Israel’s Nuclear Weapons Program”
As today, the US/Roman Empire side had lots more soldiers and resources. The billionaire (in todays $) General Crassus is similarly to the usa and Is sides leaders, full of hubris, and corruption, does not know himself or his enemy. Thus through the lens of Sun-Tzu it seems likely the aggressors in this conflict will be heading home empty handed. No loot for Don this time.
Sun Tzu predicted the outcome of most wars:
“While we have heard of stupid haste in war, we have not yet seen a clever operation that was prolonged. For there has never been a protracted war which benefited a country.” [trans. Yuan Shibing.]
There are all sorts of people in the world today who need to have this explained to them.
I wonder if under the Method and Discipline section one could argue precisely about Method and Discipline. Let me explain. The US and Israel have chosen as method to achieve their strategic goal (let’s say the destruction of Iran, balkanization & regime change) massive bombardment with missiles and bombs. Air superiority. Here the discipline would be something like choosing sequentially the objectives to be bombarded which might ensure the achievements best. Regarding method it strikes that historic lessons suggest that bombardments by themselves are rarely strategic. The larger and more complex the country, the more difficult. Regarding discipline i don’t have the necessary data to evaluate if the method has been applied in a disciplined, methodical way.
Iran’s method is very similar: bombing with missiles and drones but they seem able to achieve at least part of their stated strategic goals: one is Hormuz strait closure, with its consequences, and a second is attacking the ability of the regional oil monarchies to cooperate with the US and suffer the consequences of such cooperation. Discipline: they have relentlessly focused in US installations in the region plus important oil facilities with apparent results.
So Iran wins in the choice of method and then, if keeping a discipline with its application, would have better chances to achieve its goals.
I am going with the Sun Tzu quote-
‘If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles’
The US may have data on much of Iran’s weaponry but they do not understand the Iranians at all nor what motivates them. They thought that after a treacherous decapitation strike of their leadership, that Iran would capitulate. This in spite of the fact that this exact same tactic failed back during the 12 day war. They cannot understand why the people turn out in their hundreds of thousands onto the streets to support their government instead of bringing it down. I believe the fault here is what Yves calls ‘Orientialism’ but what it comes down to is that the US does not know their enemy at all. It sucks not to know your enemy before you attack them but I would suggest that any real Iranian experts would have been removed long, long ago in favour of neocons claiming that Iranians have Americans inside them yearning to break free.
You beat me to it. And the US neither knows itself nor does it know Iran, and nothing gets through to the DC Bubble and Echo Chamber.
Thanks for this, Curro!
I think if we put the underlying objective reasons for this “excursion”, all economic and financial and political (election and kompromat) problems facing the US empire at this time aside, and, concentrate on Trump because he is “the” person who ultimately has the capacity to pull the switch, then we have to dwell on his business practices. So the list of variables is indeed a very long one. Cunning and ruthless in the pursuit of his goals and appetites Sir has had very high highs and very low lows. Add a touch of luck, a seemingly bottomless pit of money and completely immoral — then in the world we live in, his chances of success are very good. I digress: I worked for female lawyer for a number of years at an administrative tribunal. In 1992 she knew that our family income was $200,000 annually (pretty good in Canada that time). She was a multimillionaire and so was her husband. A trip to France, etc any given weekend (unscheduled) was equivalent to me buying a cup of coffee. She said to me once that if she had to live on our income it would be to her – unbearable poverty. She meant it. Scruples: that was another issue. Administrative “judges” in Canada can be political or non-political appointments, but seemingly less corruption than what we see in the US, just saying. However it is not uncommon when seeking a continuing appointment, renewal, or appointment to another Canadian tribunal, etc. to render a decision completely at variance to the law, accepted practice, etc. – hence signalling to the decisionmakers that they are for sale. She was for sale, but her bid was not accepted. I think that Sir has had so much power and for so long that very simply — well Sir made a mistake and even though he was was conditioned by the objective conditions and kompromat, but having escaped pussy gate, felonies, impeachment, total disregard for the US Constitution — given this very simple decision, there was a momentary lack of judgment which would not have occurred to almost anyone else (others would have has a fall guy) Sir had the confidence to pull the lever/gun. But his downfall I believe was and has been that for decades of purchasing help on condition that if things went South as they say, he could blame others and escape. This time he waited too long for Plan B. Is it Dylan who sang that money does not have a smell? But this time Sir’s fingers were caught in the wringer (as a kid I did the clothes washing with the rollers (first from tub into clean water and then rolling out again, the water on the second run) and now fingers caught he is being pulled up to his shoulder. Working as an orderly I once helped a woman farmer who had had her arm ripped off (to the shoulder) in the combine. These things do happen.
It’s been a while since I read Sunzi, but IIRC there’s another point he discusses in detail somewhere in the book: alliances.
And that’s somewhere I’ve even been very surprised by Iran in this war, both in the risk they’ve taken and its (seeming so-far) success. They’ve gone straight for the US-led global economy, with all the worldwide hardship that entails, while arguably gaining in their net diplomatic position.
Much of the world population is on their side, Russia and China seem to be backing them in the ways that matter as much as ever, and the dozens of US-aligned governments that could engage in dirty tricks all day are now impotent in an open war.
Meanwhile, the US has lost the Kurds, its plans for Syria are now toast, the only real option for (what’s left of) the smaller oil sheikhdoms are collapse or accepting Iranian terms, and Iran’s Caucasian neighbors appear to be hedging their bets. And that’s just in the region: not only is the US selfishly throwing Europe, South Asia, and East Asia into economic crisis, but they even rug-pulled South Korea by relocating the THAAD system for Israel.
Sun Tzu states:
I like to quote The Art of War because it affords me the opportunity to sound like an intellectual. Fake it till you make it, eh?
What is Israel’s plan? It appears to be to embrace Zionist ideology and infect American leadership with Zionism through communication, propaganda, and bribery. We have ridiculed the Americans for not having a plan, but it appears Israel’s military stratagem is even more hollow as Israel knew from their recent misadventures in Lebanon that their “vaunted” military was just not so. Israel had “air superiority” and tanks, and they still could not win, choosing instead more propaganda to conceal its ineffectiveness. (IDF is effective at committing genocide against the Palestinians who lack a military, but that still necessitates American arms.) In other words, Israel’s plan was to get the Americans to fight Iran.
What is the American plan? Above all, the US wants to steal Iran’s oil, which the Americans have done before by force (Venezuela) or by finance (Saudi Arabia). Ritter has said repeatedly that the US wants regime change, but he should note that the US really wants a regime that will sell its oil in dollars, subjugate its population to the demands of finance, and accept being an American vassal. The stratagem to achieve this objective appears to be economic sanctions and brute force. Sanctions and force have undoubtedly hurt Iran, but recent actions have suggested that Iran can impose their own form of sanctions by stopping the flow of oil and natural gas and Iran’s military force has caused disproportionate pain for US/Israel.
Iran wants the US and Israel to be unable to threaten or sanction it. This is a lofty goal, but Iran is closer to that goal by closing the Straight of Hormuz and bombarding Israel and American assets with missiles, while eating plenty of US/Israeli ordnance. Is Iran stymieing the plans of US/Israel? Not exactly, since the US and Israel did not have a good plan from the beginning. The next best thing is to attack the alliance, but the American/Israeli alliance is sacrosanct. What could Iran do to stymie this alliance? Destroying a billion dollars worth of radars was a good start because those American radars are presumably shared with Israel. I can think of three things that bind this alliance together: Christian and Jewish Zionism, a shared racial identity that embraces violence towards racial “inferiors”, and money. Any more?
How could Iran or the rest of the world stymie this sacrosanct alliance? I’m all ears. Can the rest of the world confiscate the wealth of an American oligarch, Zionist or otherwise? Could a non-Zionist oligarch demand Israel and its population pay its debts that never seem to be a problem in Israel but are problems everywhere else? Could Iran destroy banks and financial institutions in the Middle East that have prominent pro-Zionist assets? If Iran continues pummeling Israel with missiles and communication between Israeli Zionists and American Zionists is severed, is the ideological and political link between Israel and the US weakened? Israel is the biggest loser in this war because its relatively small country will have taken the most damage. If the American neocons conclude Israel is as good as dead, do the American Zionists still have goals with respect to Israel? Does the second coming of Jesus happen if the modern “Israel” (which I believe is different than the biblical Israel) is destroyed by Iran? If Israel self-immolates, does that count as Armageddon and Judgment Day, where the Lord immolates those of insufficient faith?
As IISL notes above Sun Tzu warned:
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
I accuse the US of knowing little about itself (75 or so years of relentless propaganda aren’t helping here) and even less about Iran. Draw your own conclusions … 🤨
It’s been a while since i read Sun Tzu…
My main takeaway from it was an interpretation of the saying about knowing the enemy and knowing yourself (if you know both, you don’t need to fear. if you don’t know the enemy, then it’s 50/50 or a bloody mess. If you don’t even know yourself you will lose every battle – and also the war, most likely).
“Knowing the enemy” is often, not always, interpreted as prerequisite for attacks, and “knowing yourself” as prerequisite for a successful defense.
The USA didn’t know their enemy. That no prediction came true clearly proved that.
And that the USA haven’t been able to defend their regional bases and their allies doesn’t bode well about “knowing themself”.
We’ll see whether the American empire will be able to prove the old Chinese wrong. I don’t expect it… but i do expect that 2500 from today still people will talk about the “The Art of War”, while “The Art of the Deal” will be forgotten, or maybe laughed about.
Military leadership comparison:
I wouldn‘t underestimate the powers of the mighty Minister of War.
Peter Hegseth can do a lot of push-ups and rally people behind him for the most important tasks. This ability to rally people proves full alignment between people and war-leadership.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/hegseth-sets-world-record-navy-football-game-most-people-doing-pushups-same-time
I believe that US forces could push-ups or even burpee themselves over the mountains and through the deserts of Iran. So, who‘s your boss, now, Brigadier General Vahidi?
late/early to this. my fave quote from Sun Tsu is “all tactics and no strategy is the noise before defeat”. and thats whats been in my head for these last 2 weeks. usa has no strategic ability, as currently formulated. theyve run off the people who had that ability, and replaced them with yes men and apocalypse seeking nutters.
this appears to extend well below the top levels of the decision making machinery…like how the people who had studied russia were run off because they were ideologically impure, or something.
of note, perhaps, the coaches out here encourage the football players to read Art of War and to play chess. its really the only philosophy text actually promoted in school. i remember how shocked i was when my eldest asked if i had Sun Tsu in my library,lol.
I had a weird recollection in my dozing wakening– remember 2024 Candidate Trump stating,
“finish the job” during the Israeli punishing non-proportionate retaliatory demolition of Gaza and extirpation of Palestinians?
Now we have the threat of mid-Term elections, loss of power in the Legislature, potential charges and jail, and acolytes with God on their side.
I see Pete Hegseth as Slim Pickens, Stephen Miller and Peter Thiel vying for the Peter Sellers role.
USrael’s gamble is that one could plausibly have a limited nuclear conflict? Or worse, why worry about it being limited. Scorched Earth and a few souls ascending into LDS/Maxfield Parrish clouds?
Lordy!
Finally, I did not realize there was winning in war. We are one funny old monkey.
There’s no winning, but you can certainly lose.
Methinks the Iranians are following Sun Tzu, the Chinese military theorist, while the Americans observe the ways of “… Sun Tuh-Zoo, the Chinese Prince Matchabelli,” as per Paulie Walnuts of The Sopranos.
https://.YouTube.com/watch?v=YonukB9yPAs&pp=ygUQU29ycmFubMgc3VulHR6dQ%
If you are familiar with the Zelen Tzu images (Zelensky in a robe and headdress of some kind with a pseudo-Sun Tzu quote alongside that offers a nonsensical excuse for why Ukraine is losing), there are also now Don Tzu images with similar quotes and an equally absurdly attired Trump. Whoever originally came up with this meme deserves some major thanks for adding a little levity to what are otherwise very unfunny realities.