This is coolbert:
As originally written by Max Hastings, noted by Vox Day, seen in Isegoria and copied here in entirety.
"War is politics by other means" but that civilian political leadership and the highest levels of military command not always so absolutely sure and confident of themselves or in total command of the situation. As it was in 1914 so it is we might well assume the same in 2014.
"While reading Catastrophe 1914, by Max Hastings, Vox Day has noticed a few things":
1. "Civilian leadership usually appoints the wrong commanders."
2. "The main thing lacking in military leaders, from the highest level to the lowest, is a willingness to accept the risk of defeat. Nothing assures failure like indecisiveness."
3. "Advances in communications technology increases the amount of civilian interference into war operations."
4. "Civilian leadership seldom has a clear objective in mind."
5. "Military commanders regard 'the book' as an intrinsic excuse and therefore have a tendency to cling to it."
6. "A historian’s take on a given war is strongly influenced by his nationalist sympathies."
7. "The temptation to interfere with a strategic plan once it is put into action appears to be almost overwhelming."
THE "PLAN" UNDERSTAND AS THE BASE FROM WHICH ALL CHANGE IS MADE. CHANGE AS NECESSITATED AN ONGOING PROCESS. THE MORE CORRECT THE ASSUMPTIONS MADE AND THE BETTER THE PLANNING ALL SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN MORE MINOR THAN MAJOR.