The Art of War – War and Military Thought, by Martin Van Creveld, Cassell & Co, London, UK, 2000 is a good introduction to strategies of war. One of the greatest of all western writers on war is Karl von Clausewitz whose book is called On War. He was a general in the Prussian army stationed in Berlin and focused his writings on two questions: what was war and what purpose did in serve? He would find an answer and the research against military history and his own experiences or his approach was both deductive and inductive. He did not go into detail about every formation but to provide commanders with a basis of though and make in unnecessary to reinvent the wheel every time. To answer the first question what is war – Clausewitz defined it as an element act of violence in which all ordinary social restraints were cast off. Since force would naturally invite the use of greater force, war also possessed an inherent tendency towards escalation which made it essentially uncontrollable and unpredictable ‘ a great passionate drama’  The key was a question of possessing the qualities needed to counter and master these inherent characteristics.

Given the high degree of uncertainty and friction involved, Clausewitz suggested the best strategy is always to be very strong, first in general and then at the decisive point, War was a physical and moral struggle by means of the former. Since the enemies strength was concentrated in his armed forces, the first objective of strategy ought always to be smash them; this achieved, his capital could be captured and his country occupied.

Consider how Clausewitz looks at the relationship between attack and defence. The outstanding quality of attack is the delivery of the blow. The outstanding quality of the defence was the need to wait for that blow and parry it. All things being equal it is easier to defend than to attack. There would be a culminating point where the attack would turn into a defence, and the defence into an attack, that is, unless the enemy had been smashed and decisive victory had been won first.

Why war – war was not simply a phenomenon in its own right. A product of social intercourse, it was, or at any rate ought to be, a deliberate political act. ‘ a continuation of policy by other means’. The logic was to be provide from the outside or a policy otherwise in would be a senseless thing, without an object.

Linking to dividend paying stocks, with profitable companies they occasionally buy other companies to diversify their income streams. Many times money is lost because management does not get the business right, this is when shareholders must ask what is the objective? why? and if you do get a good answer, move on to other dividend stocks. The other aspect to learn is similar to war, if a company is involved in a takeover bid, the price of the shares in announced and if it is not good enough the bid will take a life of its own, which management may not control.

There are more questions than answers, till the next time – to raising questions