----- Original Message ----- From: "andie nachgeborenen" <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com>
> I don't think so. Clausewitz wrote at a time before the rigidly
positivist notion of value-free social science was firmly entrenched. He
knew perfectly well, moreover, that hostorically lots of wars have been
fought for no rational political aim, but for glory or honor. And he was
targeting for normative critique (I think) what he saw as dangerous
anachronistic notions of glory and honor. (Hobbes similarly, btw.) Today,
those notions are not widely shared. But we have their counterparts, such
as the idiot notion of prestige or face that kept the US in Vietnam long
after it became clear that it was a losing proposition. Today, the
starry-eyed drive for unbridled hegmonic power that exceeds any rational
aim one might have for it and any calculation of costs is something that
has has the Bushies firmly in its grasp.
> jks
========================
Meanwhile the Bushies read Van Creveld and a slew of stuff from the paranoid wing of the 'environmental security' paradigm........................................