February 2007
Elsewhere on the WebVictor Davis Hanson’s Private Papers Victor Davis Hanson Archive on National Review OnlineTour![]() Books
A War Like No Other How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War
by Victor Hanson
Amazon.com’s Best of 2001 Many theories have been offered regarding why Western culture has spread so successfully across the world, with arguments ranging from genetics to superior technology to the creation of enlightened economic, moral, and political systems. In Carnage and Culture, military historian Victor Hanson takes all of these factors into account in making a bold, and sure to be controversial, argument: Westerners are more effective killers.
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson, John Keegan Hanson, for those who somehow have missed him until now, is a professor of Classics at California State and also is a part time farmer, both of which have contributed to his writing as a military historian. As a classicist, Hanson is well versed in the sources in their original Greek, and as a farmer he understands how agriculture affected the experience of the Greeks at war.
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson
Hanson relates the life stories of his farmer neighbors, writing that their way of life will likely soon disappear, thanks in part to a federal system of agricultural subsidies that favors large-scale, industrial farm corporations over individual “yeomen.” This is a sobering and eye-opening book. by Victor Davis Hanson On first glance, The Soul of Battle appears to be three different books: biographies of two well-known generals—Sherman and Patton—and one who is virtually unknown today, the ancient Greek leader Epaminondas. Yet Victor Davis Hanson, a classics professor and author of The Western Way of War, makes a compelling connection between these three men. They were “eccentrics, considered unbalanced or worse by their own superiors” who led democratic armies on missions of freedom.
by Robert B. Strassler (Editor), Victor Davis Hanson (Introduction)
|
February 14, 2007 1:06 PM
Something DifferentNovel Trailers I have almost finished a long novel (should be done by July), No Man A Slave, about the great march of the Boiotians under the general Epaminondas, in winter and spring 369 B.C., to liberate the Messenian helots from Spartan rule. While I can’t give away the plot and ending, from time to time I will post a few hundred words in mediis rebus from the narrative. For the first installment, see below. IFS If one were to substitute “Muslim” for “Christian” in the rants of the Edwards bloggers, would there have been any hesitation about firing them? Hamas and Fatah have different uniforms. They have two conflicting ideologies and clear antithetical agendas. And now they are killing one another. Why is this not a “civil war,” but the senseless sectarian violence in Iraq is? Punditing the War I didn’t think it was such a good idea in 1998 to go to war to remove Saddam Hussein, as the Congress, on Bill Clinton’s prompt, sort of authorized. At least that was the force of the 1998 resolution that “urges the president to take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” George Bush must have agreed as well, since he did not seem to be considering removing Saddam during his first eight months in office—but surely did after 9/11. Do we remember the rhetoric in those unhappy Clinton years, when Democrats were outdoing each other to threaten war to remove Saddam? Sen. Tom Daschle bragged that his vote for the resolution would “send as clear a message as possible that we are going to force, one way or another, diplomatically or militarily, Iraq to comply with international law.” If there were any doubt what he meant, he added, “‘Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?’ That’s what they’re saying. This is the key question. And the answer is we don’t have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily.” But after 9/11 I felt we were in a global war, both against Islamic fascists and the dictatorial regimes that sponsored them. That Saddam had harbored killers as diverse as Abu Abas, Abu Nidal, the architects of the first World Trade Center bombing, Zarqawi, the al-Qaedists in Kurdistan, and other liaisons with terrorists was, along with the other 22 “whereas” in the October 11, 2002 resolution, enough for me and most other Americans. Credo My own position on Saddam was perhaps closest to Sen. Harry Reid, who, in the post 9/11 climate of that October 2002, gave a speech to the effect that Saddam’s violations of the 1991 accords had de facto restarted the war: “That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict.” Since then, like many conservatives, I have had disagreements with the way the war has been waged—mostly the pull-back from the first siege of Fallujah, the reprieve given to Sadr, the restrictions on the use of American force, the ubiquity of American officials in Iraq on television, and the utopian effort to establish the perfect water, sewer, or electrical system rather than the ad hoc one that would do. But all that said and done, I continue to believe that by any historical standard none of those mistakes needs doom the effort, nor were they exceptional by the benchmarks of past wars, nor can we lose this war on the battlefield. If Gen. Petraeus fails he will be unfairly forgotten, but if he succeeds, and I think he will, he will be fairly canonized. A Sense of Humility? Above all, there should be a sense of humility that we over here are not in harm’s way, are not responsible for the frequent choices between the bad and only worse, and usually do more damage by ankle-biting than by offering encouragement for the difficult tasks that faces our military. The tragic loss of over 3,000 Americans, compared to the horrendous casualties of WWI, WWII, Korea, or Vietnam, is evidence of the skill and efficacy of our military in trying to guard our forces as best it can. Our goals remain noble, unlike those questionable ones in the past when we allowed Kurds and Shiites to be slaughtered, or played Iraq off against Iran. I say all this because I am surprised not that most, by 2007, have come to challenge that assessment, but that so many earlier supporters have turned not just critics of the war, but vehement critics—with a self-righteousness that is, to be candid, appalling. Memini As one example, I confess to being embarrased by the kothornos Joe Klein’s serial Time essays not only damning the administration as incompetent and nefarious, but his own self-righteous exculpation of his own past— especially his amnesia over his infamous Russert interview of 2003 calling for the removal of Saddam:
Mr. Klein has no tolerance for those he claims were not truthful on Iraq, but then most had no tolerance for the falsehoods promulgaged a decade ago about his authorship of Primary Colors. The point? Be careful about the casting of stones… No Man A Slave—Trailer #1 The excerpt is drawn from halfway in the narrative, after Leuktra, but before Sparta is overrun, in what would to us be the month November, 369 B.C., in the meeting hall of the Boiotians at Thebes. No one was quite sure what would next follow. No one in memory had voted to march so far for so long—and for so many others. An eerie silence followed. Would harsh Reason goad them back, back to blame others for the vote? Then Melon for the first time noticed that the old sophist Alkidamas of all people, the wine-soaked has-been of the symposia, not the Boiotarchs or once again Pelopidas, was approaching the bema. He was already raising both arms to calm the crowd as if he owned it. “I take this thunder as a voice vote that we are to march under your General Epaminondas in the morning. Pelopidas as his habit will be in charge of the muster. Look out in the plain below—the army is nearly ready and only awaits our nod. Let the Boiotarchs sort out the details. Though the five who had doubts have already ceded their command over to our two leaders. We have no need of the yes-and-no folk, and those who wear the double-pointed shoes. I have nothing to add to the promises of Epaminondas—other than this.” And here windy Alkidamas himself also grew quiet—not quite sure what he would say next. But speak he did, possessed as he was by some other voice he would say later, out of the mouth of Pythagoras himself. He turned to the loud hoplites in the crowd. And now he shook his finger at them as his voice went into a near whisper and oddly calm. “No man born knows who is by nature a slave, this curse that so often makes the strong and wise unfree and the weak and dull their master. Beware of those who say the Messenians know nothing of letters as if they were man-footed beasts of dim wits and animal grunts. They are unfree because they live next to the Spartans, as we the Boiotians, and Kallistratos and his fancy Athenians might well have been as well—had our borders butted such a race of granite as those who wear the red capes. Oh yes, the Messenians will be free. But their rebirth will be thanks only to the black spears of the Boiotians. In the year to come, they will have their free city of Messenê—for nature has made no man a slave.” With that final reminder to the hoplites, the strong arms of the phalanx, Alkidamas stepped down and abandoned the politics of Boiotia for good, for this man of action now had business himself in the Peloponnese. As the assembly of the Boiotians broke up, the white-haired Alkidamas lumbered over to Melon and slapped him lightly across the face, “I think I have the beginning of a real speech some day from these words that suddenly flew into my head. Such a wild daimon came into me—it was as if the one god of ours were wagging my tongue. Still is it seems.” “Maybe, so, old man. I hope to be alive to hear it again, this defense of the Messenians, this ‘no man a slave.’ For good or evil, the course of this march, as it’s turned out now, is no longer about Sparta alone. I feel something bigger in the hearts of all us. Though the ideal is still unspoken and we a tough breed are embarrassed over what it has done to us. Yes, it set us on fire—the grim farmers of Boiotia who, until today, brag to go nowhere and don’t do anything for anyone. Still, we know now that Epaminondas will go beyond his tenure that expires at the new year. All of us will then be renegades under the command of an outlaw general. And we’ll be far to the south of the Isthmos. And there will be a death sentence on our heads when—or if—we return. So be it?” “So be it,” Alkidamas shouted back as he turned to leave, and then paused , “When the law is in service to servitude, and its violation means freedom, then the choice for a good man is not hard. But remember that men, all of them I’m afraid, are fickle sorts. If the helots are freed and we tramp back alive, then our faces will be chiseled in marble up on Parnassos. But if we trip, well, then you know the fate of Epaminondas—and of all who now ride this wild horse of helot freedom.” Then as he walked out, Alkidamas ended with a final laugh, “There won’t be any Apothetai of the Spartans big enough to hide all our corpses.”
Comments (12)Junius :Herschel Smith :Dr. Professor, You mention again the restrictions on the use of force. I cannot seem to rid my mind of thinking about this topic. I have extensively covered this issue in my rules of engagement category, and my most recent article on this surveys General Caldwell's press release on ROE: [www.captainsjournal.com/2007/02/...] His talk of prohibiting U.S. forces from "firing wildly" sounds silly and rings hollow. I cite a recent report from the field by David Danelo where he describes an instance of insurgents in Ramadi using our own ROE against us. The muj pre-stage a weapon (apparently), fire it, put it down, cross the road, do it again, and so forth. One Corporal stated that the same two insurgents had crossed the road four times, each time the Marines receiving fire. But our ROE? It prevented the Marines from firing because the muj were not actively sporting a weapon in front of the Marines. And this behavior is supposed to WHAM (win hearts and minds)? Minerva :But the Greek philosophers taught that men are inclined to be slaves, right Doc? Scott :I realize VDH did not mention this event specifically, but I think it speaks to his points about how events are portrayed in the public forum. I was reading the Associated Press' report today on the gunman in the Utah Mall shooting. [www.newsday.com/news/nationworld...] The AP suggests he went on a murder spree because he was traumatized by surviving a massacre in the Balkans when he was three. Are they kidding? How many Jewish concentration camp survivors have gone on murder sprees in the last 60 years? Any at all? Right at the end of the article they quote his mom: "We're Muslims, but we're not terrorists."
Hell, maybe he was just a troubled kid. But what is the AP doing writing this kid's rampage off to a wartime childhood before the investigation has gone anywhere? It is the worst combination of PC idiocy and a therapeutic culture gone mad. Dave Begley - Omaha :Is this true re: Five for Fighting? "In fact, the title of his new album Two Lights comes from a lunch with Victor Davis Hanson." Anonymous :Let's answer some questions, shall we? We can start here: Q: If one were to substitute “Muslim” for “Christian” in the rants of the Edwards bloggers, would there have been any hesitation about firing them? A: No. Based on your written opinions, you would have cheered any anti-Islamic rantings from Liberal bloggers, but the Edwards campaign would've fired them anyway. Intolerance and all. Q: If Austrian sniper rifles really were recently sold to Iran, brought into Iraq, and used to kill Americans., what would Europeans think if American sniper weaponry were sold, under our government’s auspices, to those supplying the Basque separatists to kill Spaniards? Why no outcry from the Euro-left about the continent’s amoral propensity to sell the Iranian thugocracy about anything it wants? A: Seeking a rhetorical answer from some made-up lefty Euro-type seems below your pay-grade, no? Whatever they might say would be the object of your next tirade. Shooting down made up straw men; well, you know the saying. Q: "Hamas and Fatah have different uniforms. They have two conflicting ideologies and clear antithetical agendas. And now they are killing one another. Why is this not a “civil war,” but the senseless sectarian violence in Iraq is?" A: Because it's taking place on a tiny strip of land that is under siege by a neighboring military force. Iraq is in a low-level civil war. The Difference? Population. There are 26 million people that inhabit Iraq, anyone out the there have the figures on Gaza and the West Bank? Being wrong, about almost everything, seems to be the best career move in the world these days. I'm personally amazed at how all of your historical mumbojumbo, you know, that shit you pawn off to the rubes as "knowledge", actually still sells. I may stupid, but at least I'm the intellectual toilet you are. God Bless me for that. Kurt :"Why no outcry from the Euro-left about the continent’s amoral propensity to sell the Iranian thugocracy about anything it wants?" Eh, dude, free markets. I mean, you guys sold them missiles, right? To quote Alkidamas, "Remember that men, all of them I’m afraid, are fickle sorts" Von Zeppelin :. . ."in mediis rebus"? In this context ("into the midst of the story") "in" takes the accusative, no? Also, shouldn't "rebus" be in the genitive? As in "in medias res." I can understand why you don't want to give away the plot of the novel. Does Epaminondas still get killed at Mantinea? It would be cool if he could survive and smack down that upstart Alexander of Macedon a few years later. wf :"you guys sold them missiles, right?" Kurt: No. Instead of sarcasm, can you provide any specifics? P. Ami :Anonymous, In taking on VDH's questions you responded to his first with a firm negative. When tackling the second of his question you avoided answering it do to an assumption that VDH would find fault in whatever that answer might be. To the final question, you chose to redefine the words, Civil War, in an effort to avoid confronting another hypocrisy that many of us swallow in our enthusiasm for this American sectarian conflict of ideas between the current crop of hawks and doves. This hypocrisy is that we stop using established definitions of words if doing so is accurate and yet won’t support our argument. In my own response to analysis of your comments I have the following to say. Whatever the Edwards campaign might have done, if “Christian” had replaced “Muslim”, VDH has never been anti-Islam. His criticism has been of any ideology that wishes to corrupt the greatest principles of Western Civilization; individualism, responsibility, consensual cooperation and ownership of what you produce. These ideas are not unique to Western Civilization but how we realize these principles in action is unique. When VDH sees these ideas compromised by anyone he is critical. If it's greatest detractors happen to be Europeans, Leftists and Muslims, so be it. I have broadly responded to your criticisms of the first two questions. For the question regarding a civil war in the PA, the fact is that factions in the PA government are killing each other, as well as the family members of their enemies. In a country as large and populous as Iraq the war between factions takes place in many locations. Relative to the size of the PA, the same density of destruction is occurring. The fact that Israel’s defensive response to the murderous policies of the PA against Israeli citizens is a contributing factor to this Palestinian Civil War does not change the meaning of this conflict or the word we use to describe it. I'm curious as to what you have studied to make your mumbo-jumbo so much less wrong then the well-established history of Western Civilization that you characterize as, "the shit you {VDH} pawn off to the rubes". I suppose that only rubes would buy his "faux-histories", and perhaps see value in comparing examples from history to current events. We may even see the root causes of some of the most destructive disagreements we have today, if we study the thoughts and actions of those who lived when such conflicts began. Meanwhile you, VDH's intellectual equal, have no need for such restrictions on your worldview, as historical study has a habit of presenting us with such trivial irritants as actual events. You feel further burdened by analysis of these events by the various great thinkers of the past. Their profound insights get in the way of convincing the whole world to be guided by the momentary whims of an anonymous intellectual toilet. Fred Beloit :Anonymous, above, is full of high sentence but a bit obtuse (T. S. Eliot I think) but not completely unfunny. For example, in his first answer he supposes "...anti-Islamic rantings by Liberal bloggers..." would cause the Edwards campaign to fire the religious bigot twins. Of course they would have. Who would ever have thought differently? The point is they might accept bigotry against catholics, and even men, but never against Islamists. So? What? But what about the infamous "second chance" after being attacked by the nutroots? Therein was the double standard. dearieme :"what would Europeans think if American sniper weaponry were sold, under our government’s auspices, to those supplying the Basque separatists to kill Spaniards?" Probably much what many Britons think about American financial and political support for IRA terrorists who were blowing Britons up. Just a guess, of course. Comments have been archived for this page. |
Pajamas MediaPJM Political 8/27/08: Michelle Malkin & Co. Survive Denver–Plus A PJTV Preview! Pajamas TV Launches Live from DNC: Hillary the Angry Populist, Part II Live from DNC: Is Opposition to Obama in Denver Due to Racism?(Day 3) Live from DNC: It’s Zombietime! (Day 3) Big Labor Safeguards Its Big Stake in Obama BBC’s Terrorists in Need Live From DNC: Hillary Releases Her Delegates, Urges Unanimous Obama Vote
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
RSS FeedsADVERTISEMENT
|
I recall an early 2001 "60 Minutes" broadcast which examined how the US was losing influence in the Gulf States because of the failure to remove Saddam Hussein from power. At that time political opinion in Kuwait was reported to be moving away from the US and towards Saddam's Iraq because it was evident that the UN sanctions and American policy were not going to change the Iraqi state. If the US had not invaded Iraq, today, the Party (that once balanced both civil rights proponents and die-hard segregationists within its ranks) would be attacking the Administration for the suffering of Iraqis under sanctions, and the failure to use the military to kick Saddam out of power. An example of the "baneful effects of Faction" against which the Founders warned.
Feb 14, 2007 10:32 PM