Fascinating idea that the right questions, wrong answers could propel so much thought.
Also, thank you for including the refutations to Luttwak. Wanted to read more of his work (I genuinely enjoyed Strategy) so getting a more balanced sense of what he's talking about is very helpful.
IMHO Logic of Strategy and Coup De'tat are the good ones. The China book is bad. The Rome book was wrong but good for reasons stated here; his Byzantine book did not have the same effect on that field.
It does remind me of Cunningham's Law: "The best way to get the right answer on the Internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer."
"What does one call a person who shows the path even though he is not a forerunner in the conventional sense?" Isn't this just dialectical?
Fascinating idea that the right questions, wrong answers could propel so much thought.
Also, thank you for including the refutations to Luttwak. Wanted to read more of his work (I genuinely enjoyed Strategy) so getting a more balanced sense of what he's talking about is very helpful.
IMHO Logic of Strategy and Coup De'tat are the good ones. The China book is bad. The Rome book was wrong but good for reasons stated here; his Byzantine book did not have the same effect on that field.