Sun Tzu: The Art of War 

Biographics thank you again

Time for a biographics episode on Simon Whistler.

@@ericme4767 One of our writers did a quick written bio about herself. ru-vid.com/show-UClnDI2sdehVm1zm_LmUHsjQcommunity?lb=UgxIAdoZqqq0wgIzlqd4AaABCQ

What happened to Simon's head??? That must've bled like crazy!

Put Irish leader Michael Collins on a poll!

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

@Robo Redneck 1qq+

Not funny, didn't laugh.

Bhahahahahahaha🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👍👍

Germans: “We invented blitzkrieg!” 2000 year old Chinese War Santa Claus: “Hold my tea”

If I could go back in time and do one thing.. It would be to use this as my senior quote in my high school yearbook

@Abu Omer Commander of the fish tank, master of all 7 lightsaber forms, god himself

"spank the flank" Sun tzu

He who runs in front of car gets tired. He who runs behind car gets exhausted. - Sun Tzu

"Yes sir" - Alexander the Great

😂😂

JJ

🤤

Yep. Notice how that works for the powerful today. Useless celebs parade around like peacocks while billionaires & rulers today wear simple, conservative suits & hide from the public.

Every time North Korea shows off a missile launch while we don't know if Israel has operational nukes, I think of this quote.

Why are all the quotes clever or slightly vague word plays? Like: "Everything is nothing, and nothing is everything." It's obviously not logical. Phrases like these never are. "Appear weak when you are strong" 1. My guess is that this means that one should assume that an attacking enemy will always prepare and use an army that is sufficient to win, before attacking. This would cause him to bring too little troops. "And strong when you are weak." If (1.) is true, then appearing stronger than you are will cause the attacker to send an army that is complete overkill. By appearing stronger than you are, you are attacked with an army you have no hope of defeating. Enemies might form coalitions because your appearance of being strong scares them to unite (even though you are weak, and could have won if they did not join forces) Imagine if Pyrhuss fooled the Romans into thinking he had a bigger army. The Romans would have dispatched a bigger. There would be no Pyrrhic victory...just a flat out Pyrrhic defeat. One could also say that pretending to be strong deters attackers. But then that would mean the if you're strong, and you pretend to be weak, you'll just end up encouraging more enemies to attack you. You might win. But everyone attacking you because they think you are weak would grind you down. I have a feeling Sun Tzu was high when he come up with this "Everything is nothing, and nothing is everything" type of nonsense.

@@tylerdurden3722 nah. You have to consider this was written in A time when wars were simpler. When wars in China were wars were just evolving from glorified duels that involves thousands which Was how european wars were fought even in the 1500s. you also have to consider that this only works in wars. In his book, that "appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak" do not apply to hordes of enemies of different parties. Sun Tzu's priority is not even war itslef but diplomacy. So if youre a mediocre passive diplomatic kingdom, you will not be ganged up upon especially because of your diplomacy, and you will surely have allies already. So if an enemy attacks, you will be at least not attacked by your allies if not offered help by them. There's also a chapter in his book that states when there are like three or more parties (includng yourself), make sure to ally with at least one. It's common sense, yes, but being deceptive like that in wars goes against "honor/valor" or the feudal people not just china. So, firstly, be diplomatic and gain allies. If you get pulled into war, if you're strong, act like a sheep and that will give you the advantage of surprise. If they underestimate you, you can take advantage of that and can overwhelm them with either numbers of strategies based on your numerous scouts. At that time, not everyone had the resources to just Wage war so multiple kingdoms engaging wars against a single enemy is rare. If an ally of your enemy would show signs of attacking you after winning an exhausting war, your allies will keep your enemies allies in check. I Understand the concern that appearing weak when you're strong indeed would make you look like an easy target. But if you're strong, you will have resources to make allies and enter negotiations. If you don't want to pay up, you will have to work hard in appearing to be weak. Appearing to be weak to the point it will make you look unassuming and overlooked. This was Thailand over the course of history. While yes, they were never a superpower, they had resources whichcomes in territory. Territory they had no time to manage. But terrtory they used to pay in negotiations. Theiraristocracy also learned the superpowers' culture and language and made friends with them that when the europeans started really colonizing in asia, they were treated as a neutral ground. If you're weaK, you can do guerilla fighting. And here comes in another sun tzu tactic "attack where the enemy is weak". So by ambushing and engaging numerous skirmishes against stray platoons of the main army, the enemy might 1. Think you have more forces than they expected so they will think twice about attacking your base. Multiple attacks from many sides will give the illusion that your army is spread out, When in actuality you only have few platoons thatis doing those attacks. This will buy you time if you were to ask for help from allies, or rotate your soldiers. 2. The enemies will be used to your numerous small attacks and will be exhausted defending their slower moving army from your quick moving guerilla soldiers. If they lose many small skirmishes, this lower their morale. So what if they make it close your doorstep? you can fake numerous traps. And make sure to force their march to go through a terrain that will make them susceptible to ambushes. even if you don't have the spare troops to ambush, the enemy traversing that path alone will incite their paranoia about incoming ambushes. This will further exhaust them. Finally,You can bluff by disguising your civilians into soldiers which will make your base appear tightly defended. . these methods were relatively new back then. So no, it's not just some empty musings. while war strategy have evolved over the two millenia, some thanks to Sun Tzu, that made some of his Art of War obsolete, they were never none sense.

@@antislutful you say, "if one is a mediocre diplomatic Kingdom you will not be ganged up upon" Then why does Sun Tzu say "when you are weak, appear strong"? If you follow his advice, you will no longer appear mediocre...they will gang up on you because they think you are strong. (according to your interpretation of this statement) In my original post, I was trying to point out that Sun Tzu's statement is a paradox...it's illogical. It's illogical in the same way the following sentence is illogical. "Everything is nothing. And nothing is everything." Paradoxes like these have a tendency to come accross as something profound and deep...to someone who misses the fact that the statement is illogical. Sun Tzu uses this form to put together sentences to create such an emotional impression on a reader. But, statements like that are illogical and will always produce contradictions when tested.

More like Stalin...

lol I've been looking for a Technoblade comment

E

Oh no people drag Simon alllll the time about his pronunciations. TopTenz and Today I Found Out is where people go crazy about it.

@Mariela Que So true and already got a complaint on this video. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-tnGSY3QuJXw.html&lc=UgxYF_Fi7dbTua2DdIh4AaABAg

I complain all the time about it

Is this your first time on the Internet?

^^ guys I was joking 🤦🏾‍♂️😂 I know people give him a hard time about it

I did the same thing. Scrolled down, saw it and said “oh shit yeah!” as I was clicking the link.

Tiócfáidh ár lá

@@Order-Joshua mholl an óige agus tiocfaidh ár lá

ca bhfuil mo paístí

@@BroznikTSOC ina culadh sa leaba?

I think that's Napoleon.

A man of culture

Dear jojo fan Not everything is a jojo reference Sincerely - a sick and annoyed human being tired of jojo memes

@@kulot-ki1tu ohh I see an enemy of the culture here

@@kulot-ki1tu That's not even remotely true.

@@Lowlandlord The thing is a majority of jojo fans overuse memes, have you seen discord servers? someone is always posting a meme about jojo

This comment took me by surprise

Congrats on the heart.

@@romelnegut2005 Don't be fooled, mate. It's a _Sun Tzu_ tactic to flatter me to let my guard down. ...I'm watching you, Producers _Shell Harris_ and _Jennifer da Silva!_ (That's right, I did my research, people; they're using _Simon_ as just a decoy here! )

@@oslonorway547 Jen is really good at editing or so it seems. I will keep an eye on them.

@@oslonorway547 We picked this about a month ago through a poll. ru-vid.com/show-UClnDI2sdehVm1zm_LmUHsjQcommunity?lb=Ugyz9f6Bcihoti7Sroh4AaABCQ

its honestly so short you can finish it in an afternoon. its like 130 pages long

@@PattyOflan88 I have a book of 200 pages. Maybe because our language is different or something

@@ubisons6161 what? What is your language?

Yes please so you're loyal subscribers are patiently waiting

@@ubisons6161 There are many nearly illiterate Americans due to our country's inability to properly prioritise public education in America, unlike the rest of the 1st world. Also there are plenty of dyslexic and ADD folks who'd bennifit from a synopsis of the Taoist strategies contained in " The Art of War"

Just a heads up Warring states period 475 BC - 221 BC Yellow turban rebellion 184 AD

@@darrentan6863 Good point I didn't know that. I was thinking more along the lines of "Total War has a game coming out soon, and this is related"

Hotsauce 955 Went down to the comments just to find this

@Robo Redneck bruh wut?

WW2 D day the battle of waterloo and Vietnam

Travis Kopplinger We could even take modern examples such as the Battle of Takur Ghar in March of 2002. 🤙🏻

Battle of Cannae- always leave an opening and when they find out their escape is false their morale will break, basically Hannibal attacked Roman flanks and their only escape was backwards however when carthaganian cavalry stopped their only hope their morale collapsed Teutoberg forest- the battle is pretty complex so I recommend you to find it out for your own, Germans used deception, made Rome think they were friends deep in German lands Vietnam- without people's support for the war any war falls apart, Vietnamese will to fight was never broken however the american people didn't want war after seeing footage of their injured and dead soldiers D-day- all warfare is deception+put the men in the face of death where there is no escape and they will fight like demons they have nothing to lose, allies decieved Hitler into thinking they were gonna invade somewhere else and allied troops had no possibility of escaping thus the only way they would survive is by winning, there was no turning back Gulf war- attack directly, secure victory indirectly: coalition troops attacked Kuwait so the Iraqis would engage their troops in the lands they recently conquered however coalition troops surprised them by going trough their western front where they had minimal troops thus trapping every Iraqi in Kuwait and securing victory, this is also commonely known as the hammer and anvil Takeda shingen- studied the art of war and implemented his methods in battle (fūrinkazan) Mao Zedong- knew his enemy very well and knew how he could gain support from the people Cao Cao- a well known Chinese strategist who read the art of war though he removed some passages for an unknown reason KGB- appear weak when you're strong and strong when you're weak, KGB caught a lot of spies by making them think they found KGB's weakness Sorry for answering 10 months later but these are few examples of how they were implemented a lot of them aren't battles but it should give you an idea, Afghanistan is also an example however I don't know much about that

Normany Landing is a great example of using Double Agent and Doomed Spies.

Operation desert storm and desert shield

I wonder what would happen if we went back into isolation. No doubt the world would once again drag us into a global conflict.

Also...tell that to Rome.

@@StudleyDuderight the world has never dragged America to a global conflict

@@emilitious7886 Uhh... Two world wars would disagree with you guy.

@@StudleyDuderight World War 1 was a choice while WW2 was dragged.

Thank you!

His teachings in just a few words are so important that the book was used by military schools today

"The Art of War" ... "The Prince" ... "Anti Machiavel " ... All 3 are MUST Reads, IMHO ........ And MUST Comprehends too ..... "How to Win Friends and Influence People" is another one that I found to be VERY Informative.

Too bad the US never listen to a word.

@@marilynbell3243 Sun Tzu wins without fighting, the US wins without fighting too; creating conflicts amongst others. It's the same strategy but different style; the American style.🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑

@@brianliew5901 Gigachad Americans

Its not a big issue for me especially when the speaker makes an effort which he clearly did. Also it's not the easiest language for a Westerner to get spot on.

@@lanorothwolf2184 he isn't speaking your language he is pulling proper nouns out, asian people call me Kawrin instead of Colin, a lot, do I get upset, or even correct them? No, grow up dude your culture isn't so important that other people can't explore it if they don't meet your standards.

Blood for the blood god

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD

B L O O D F O R T H E B L O O D G O D

I dropkicked the orphan in self defense

Don’t need organized slaves- I mean prisoners!

Imagine v for vendetta but without superpowers

Yeah, but that doesn't really reflect on the book. I mean, if you take a look a the list of books banned by a prison or group of prisons, only a minuscule percentage are actually banned for a valid reason or concern. For instance, in Texas state prisons, books like 'Where's Waldo" and "Freakenomics" are banned but "Mein Kampf" is not. People who get educated in prison, are less likely to return to prison and that's bad for prison business. Nobody really cares what happens to people in prison.

@@ChickSage I'm sorry but I'm finding that hard to believe. Please name the prison where where's Waldo is banned and Hitler's book isn't?

I'm allergic to prison, if I get put in one I break out....

Divine victory. Agreed !

I think capture of crimea by Russia in 2014 can be considered victory without battle

They do go together good.

Also available free, at Project Gutenberg.

Does anyone remember the old PBS show Meeting of Minds? I miss that show. I really learned a lot from it. I'd love to see a Meeting of Minds episode with Sun Tzu, Julius Caesar, Machiavelli and George Patton. I'm not a war buff, but I'd like to hear them discuss their philosophies.

Another is Robert Greene's 48 laws of power which is pretty modern

Agreed Have Read it as well years Ago who Has Read this Before Also??Let us know As well as what Did you think of it??And if you Reply 2 this let us know your Replying 2 this very comment And Thanks?!!Good video Simon As usually who Agrees??Wanted this video on Sun tzu For A long while now who Agrees?? And Thanks?!!

@@jeffmurphy8283 I think you should read it at different ages. I've been reading it since I was 18 and even though it's called "The Art of War" it can apply to everyday life.

Read it backwards. That's what Sun Tzu intended.

@Beth Roesch . Do you have any examples

@Bat Orgil Considering they completely didn't apply the precepts of the art of war it was inevitable they got beaten repeatedly

Jeezus that's some odd calibers

.30?

We'll have it in a plaque in a famous College, one of these days. "True wisdom comes from a big beard. Not a big head."

😂😂😂😂

This is the strangest comment I've ever seen

The Tao Te Ching is great too. Would love to see it covered.

Better idea: Simon should just record it. It's public domain after all.

Military History Visualized did a video on the Art of War.

@@Wallyworld30 I'll check it out

Tell that to the Romans. They attacked first and asked questions later. Everyone knew Rome, yet they all succumbed. Rome succumbed in some of the battles...but not every battle, as Sun Tzu says.

Tyler Durden tell that to Varus in teutoberg forest, the Germans knew how the romans would attack them and slaughtered them because of it

@@tylerdurden3722 NEITHER enemy nor self is a very important distinction. the romans knew not some enemies, but they knew themselves. they had an absolute mastery of utilizing their men and tools (well at least caesar did). the point of the quote is basically to know everything about yourself/army/state. some people overestimate themselves, ie they don't know themselves. one real world modern example is assuming you are a good fighter, and challenging a random person to a fight. a good fighter knows their weaknesses, and can work around them to avoid problems. but somebody who is overconfident and doesn't know their weaknesses, and whom challenges a foe unknown to them, will get their ass handed to them. likewise, if you don't know your weakness, but you know for a fact your opponent has a huge weakness, you can still win by exploiting it. the point is if you don't know EITHER then you will be screwed

@@RaceChapman the Romans is actually the perfect example that is the exact opposite. Hannibal would have been a better example. He turned his armies weaknesses, into strengths. But, dispite this and winning spectacular battles, he lost the war. The Romans were the opposite. They were very traditional and procedural. They would basically send as many men as they could into the meat grinder... because that was the Roman way...to fight head on...they considered tactical tricks as cowardice (Ceasar was hated for being a typical sly politician...and very good at it). Most of their wars involved sending in an army, blind. Then having a few armies massacred by the enemy because of overconfidence and ignorance. But it's their stubborn ignorance that made the Romans the Romans. The only reason they didn't loose the war against Hannibal, dispite loosing virtually all battles, was because they were too arrogant and stubborn lose😅. This happened over and over and over against many powerful enemies and they ruled over them for a 1000 years. Roman armies sent into the meatgrinder would get slaughtered, but eventually, they end up winning the war. The Romans usually attacked without knowing their enemy...most of the time they'd win...with an incompetent general in charge(who didn't understand his own army or the enemy)...the Roman army just grinded through everything (eventually)...they were too arrogant to think they'd lose against anyone (I think it's because they use lead eating utensils 😅...lead poisoning made them like ferocious zombies)...sometimes they'd lose battles, of course (but they'd just send more men into the meat grinder, until they won). The point is, Sun Tsu was wrong, he said that if e.g. Rome engaged an enemy without knowing that enemy, or themselves, they'd lose every battle. Yet, most of the time that was not the case for Rome.

@@tylerdurden3722 The Romans were stubborn, but even they grew tired of banging their heads on German trees forever on end. When you know your army is ill-suited for fighting in forests, don't wage war where there is basically nothing but forests. They quit their Northern expansion due to having basically no army left to expand with.

BLOOD FOR BLOOD GOD

@@sherwingonsalves8821 BRING HIM THE POTATOES

ALL HAIL THE PIG KING

He used Sun Tsu, defeating the enemy quickly and affectively, before they prepare! 😂

Jeffery beaty *it’s

That bored huh?

@@2sexyfomyshirt You're welcome

Oooh, good suggestion.

I'd like to see it

Yes me too

10/10 would watch.

It was interesting to notice while reading the book for the first time how I managed to apply something like half of it while playing Civilization games prior to reading it...

Winston Churchill won the biggest most important Good vs Evil War of all time !!!!! He probably knew these other two main books on Strategy ... as we should know his. ' Memoirs of The Second World War ' is excellent !!

@@RB-ye4ri I would like to agree with you here. While I might consider the whole war more nuanced than a simple good versus evil affair, it's the closest we get in human history to that on a whole. Sun Tzu and Clausewitz both have endured in their relevancy, compare that to Baron Jomini's "Summary of the Art of War" which was truly relevant for the immediate post-Napoleonic era but already broke down in the face of massed rifled muskets in the ACW, let alone the age of railroads, Iron and Blood dawning in Europe at the time. Best regards Raoul G. Kunz

Ancient Knowledge