(Part 2) Reddit mentions: The best military history books

>bigger navy's

I don't think there were any larger navies, really. All of my books are packed up at the moment, but I am pretty sure the Royal Navy was, by far, the largest. It came at a price, though. The British army, by comparison, was small and much less effective. The British could afford to neglect their land forces, by comparison, because they for the most part, no longer had enemies that could invade by land.

Because of this, too, especially during the Napoleonic Wars, British sailors and officers were much more experienced than their Spanish and French counterparts, partly because the French Revolution decimated the French naval officer corps, and because French military ships spent most of their time bottled up in port by the British blockade. So, it is why Nelson wanted to sail in close with the French and Spanish at Trafalgar, trusting to superior British gunnery (In that they could fire much faster, thanks to experience) and the greater skill of his officers, to overcome the relatively inexperienced Combined fleet.

The French, on the other hand, had to maintain a large army because they were constantly fighting wars in Europe, specifically against their Habsburg rivals in Austria.

Nor did they always win. The most important example of this is the Battle of the Chesapeake in 1781, which led to the French blockading Cornwallis in Yorktown, and his eventual surrender during the American Revolution.

In any case, I'm not too knowledgeable about how promotion in the French navy of the period worked (And would love if someone could fill me in on it), but the British had a semi-meritocratic system of filling their officer corps and promotion. British officers started out essentially as apprentice officers, midshipmen. To get their first real promotion, they had to pass an examination conducted by superior officers to achieve the rank of lieutenant, and then had to either distinguish themselves, get lucky, or have family connections in order to receive a post-captainship. Though, once they got there, promotion was determined only by seniority, and as long as they did not die or disgrace themselves, they would eventually end up an admiral.

So, I think it, generally, was a result of Britain's focus on its naval assets (which none of the other powers did to the same extent), it's system of semi-meritocratic promotion, and really, just luck in some of the people that ended up in the Royal Navy, such as Horatio Nelson.

This is really a question that can't be answered in such a short post. There are tons of books about the subject. Some works that are on the general subject are Command at Sea: Naval Command and Control since the Sixteenth Century, pretty much any of the books by N.A.M Rodgers on the subject. John Keegan also talks a bit about it in his chapter on Trafalgar in The Price of Admiralty

I hope the post helps. I don't think I really can do it justice in this format, though. Plus, I just kinda woke up, so I am not sure if my brain is completely on at this moment!

So this may not be the kind of advice you are hoping for but in order to really have success with the Mirage, it is important to really learn the aircraft. This goes beyond just understanding the basics of systems operation and gets into the very idea behind the specific model of the Mirage-2000C that we are using and how that specific model fit into France's air power "ecosystem". What I am talking about here is understanding the roles it was realistically expected to fill and what roles would be left to other aircraft in the French Air force.

All of that may seem boring or even pointless in the DCS PvP context but I think really understanding what the Mirage-2000C-RDI S5 (the specific model we have in DCS) is supposed to do and how it is used will help you avoid trying to use it in a way that will only lead to frustration.

On a more general level. I think that a big part of seeing any success with a plane in DCS PvP comes down to knowing everything you can learn about its systems and how they are used. This means knowing all the radar special modes. This means understanding the exact capability of your radar, weapons, ECM, and even your engine and aerodynamic properties. A lot of your opponents are in faster aircraft with better radar and much better weapons and there is a good chance that they have been playing for a while and know their stuff (at least in how it applies to PvP public servers anyway). If you don't bring your "A-game", you are easy meat for them.

Another element to look at is tactics. This is a difficult situation because DCS's PvP servers tend to promote a certain kind of approach that does not jive too well with how air combat would work in the real world. With this in mind, you have to really look at the flow of things on a the server itself and how you can exploit advantages from that flow. For example. It is generally safe to assume that you will be fighting aircraft that can out-range and out-gun you. With that in mind, perhaps it is better to simply avoid straight-on "fair fights" and instead try to find ways to approach the enemy from directions that they are not used to looking.

If I were to frequent a server like the 104th, I would probably spend some time looking at where the combat happens most. Try to determine the routes that both my team and the enemy team are commonly taking to get into combat. From there, I would try to rely on whatever data I could get from a AWACS (if it is a option) or other players. With that data, I would take long, wide routes so that I can intercept other players from angles that there radar can't see and hopefully get the drop on them while they are focused on looking in front where most of the action is going to be.

Another thing I would consider is your altitude. Many will tell you to stay low and there is value in that but flying rather high can also be useful. The Mirage's weapons (especially the Super 530D) work better at higher altitudes so in order to maximize your weapon range, you will need to start getting used to climbing up to about 35,000 feet or more. It may be smart to climb in a direction away from the action so you can approach the combat area at your desired altitude. Many flight simmers tend to not spend a lot of time climbing as that is time spent not fighting. take advantage of that and you will have one more advantage to leverage in a fight.

Finally. I suggest finding a person to wing up with you that you can count on. Someone that knows how to fly and knows how to work with you as a proper team. If you can apply some proper tactics as a two-man team, you will be in a good position to do some damage.

Overall, you should start doing your homework. Hit the manual (it is a important foundation that should not be replaced with more abbreviated material), Chuck's guides, and any meaningful youtube lesson you can find (I suggest xxJohnxx's channel and even Creative Fun's channel for good, useful tutorials) should all be studied alongside any real-life information you can google search about the plane (and the specific version we use in DCS). Doing all this in conjunction with learning about basic tactics will go a long way and will certainly give you a leg-up over some who frequent those servers who don't really bother to do all that book-work.

It may all seem daunting but take it one step at a time. Learning this stuff is not too different from the process one must take to learn how to play on a competitive level (I am talking e-sport style here) on a MOBA or even Counter-strike. The more effort you put into learning, the better you will be and the more enjoyment you will have in the long-term.

Quicksand, by Geoffry Wawro

Power, Faith, and Fantasy by Michael Oren

The Coming Anarchy by Robert Kaplan

The Revenge of Geography by Robert Kaplan

The Shia Revival by Vali Nasr (although to be honest I found this one a little dull)

Imperial Life in the Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran

Little America by Rajiv Chandrasekaran

Soldiers of God by Robert Kaplan

Sleeping with the Devil by Baer

Dirty Wars by Jeremey Scahill

Ghost Wars by Steve Coll

Charlie Wilson's War by George Crile

The Way of the Knife by Mark Mazzetti

Eastward to Tartary by Robert Kaplan (I actually haven't read this one yet but it's definitely on my to do list and I'm a huge fan of Kaplan's writing, observation, and analysis.)

The Ends of the Earth by Robert Kaplan

This is a partial list of some books I've read in the past couple of years. I put stars next to the ones that I think are the really really excellent ones. Some of them aren't entirely about the Middle East but the concepts in them are really important if you want to understand the region. I hope you look through the list and at the very least look at some of the books that Amazon recommends to go along with these books.

Oh, you should also check out this essay. I like to think it's decent reading if you want to understand what motivated Bin Laden and the context surrounding his life.

If you manage to read just a few of these, and also keep up with the news (I recommend a subscription to the Economist and to the New York Times) you will be a phenomenally well educated person about the Middle East.

Often times in the lives of humans we let ourselves be defined by externals, but this is only truly harmful to those who have never defined themselves internally, because without this internal definition, this laying out of who we are as defined by what we value most in the universe around us, without this, external definitions become the only thing we are and this is a horrible place to be.

When I find myself in a dark place, defined by things external to myself which leave me little control or direction in my own life, I look again at my internal definition of myself, my definition of the universe around me and when those are again refreshed in my mind, the external things loose their power because the master context of my life is switched back to those things most important -- valuable -- to me and my life.

If you don't have your own base definition of yourself, only just some awkward feeling of self left over from times past, then I envy you your task, for you get to build your definition in your immediate future, while mine was built so long ago -- not yet complete, but then I'm not yet dead.

Build your definition of yourself. There are many ways to do this. One thing which was most helpful to me at the age of twenty-two when I found it was this warrior's book, "A Happy Death" for it helped me understand that morals need not be religious, that self-interest and care was not selfishness, and that to live your life with the purpose of becoming the best human you can be is the most honorable way to die, and if you were this guy, well, the answer would be the same. His book tells a warrior's tale, too.

Accept that you were a warrior then, that you're a warrior now, and only the battle has changed. Build your self, it's your primary tool and will let you permanently put the externalities in their proper perspective.

Best wishes, warrior.

> To me, you just sound like another apathetic, seventeen year old nihilistic high-school kid who thinks he has all the answers about life, the universe and everything.

First, I am almost certainly at least as old (37), educated (professional research scientist with a PhD), and experienced in life in general (married, productively employed) as you.

As to the charge of being apathetic and nihilistic, I have embraced a single ideal: That which fails in practice is also incorrect in principle.. People who think that morality comes from ideals have lost the recognition that moral ideals as we know them are the RESULT of the most pragmatic force in the universe: natural selection. The ideals we think of as moral today are the ones that survived from historic times not because they met some emotional, superstitious or imaginary criteria of justice but because they WORKED: Civilized nations succeeded where barbarous ones failed. Moral societies that enshrine property rights and freedom and individualism and reason build industry and superior armies where immoral ones based upon cleptocracy, superstition, slavery, and tyranny failed to do so. I heartily recommend the book Carnage and Culture detailing the mechanisms of how the moral values of the west lead in a direct way to the domination of western culture and those values over the value systems of non-western foes. This book, with the most clear and unambiguous standard that exists in the study of history (war) just exactly how pragmatism is the ideal that all moral ideals derive from and depend upon.

I have not claimed to know everything, I have merely threaded upon YOUR SACRED COW: the belief that human-nature can somehow be made better, and that ideals trump results. This belief is a religious fallacy every bit as unsupported and delusional as the rankest of superstitions. It is well past time that civilized people discredited it.

> First off, Ron Paul has never expected to sweepingly change American Politics. He isn't a revolutionary he is a progressive. He doesn't want things to change tomorrow like some instantaneous spell. He wants to see major changes over an extended period of time.

Ron Paul stands for positions that will never be enacted because their political unpopularity makes them unreasonable to the bulk of the electorate. As just an example, he opposes the very existence of a modern currency system. He has himself stated that he considers the audit the fed initiative to be just the beginning of an effort to massively reform or eliminate the institution and has even wistfully (and probably not seriously) compared a gold standard favorably to our current monetary system. Another example of his extremism is his refusal to accept the fact that the US is a superpower and that we discard that role at our own peril. History has amply demonstrated that isolationism is a luxury that only client states of large empires can afford. Further, the fact that he is willing to play the game doesn't mean that he's playing toward goals that are impossible to achieve. Nor does it make his comments concerning Paul Ryan any less the response of an idealist decrying pragmatic attitudes. Ryan's economic plan was built around what could be achieved within current political realities, and ideals only second. Paul's economic plans ignore political realities making them as irrelevant as fairy tales.

> Just because people WANT to clean up dirty politics... doesn't mean they are delusional.

Yes it does. It's like some, but not all, Libertarians who WANT absolute freedom despite the fact that it's a contradiction in terms. It's like certain people who think that we will eventually reach an economic state of "post scarcity." Wanting something that can not be achieved under any circumstances is the very definition of what makes a "delusion".

> Do you suggest we just let politics be dirty since it has and "will ALWAYS be like this"?

Yes. That's why small government is a good idea... minimize the problem, don't try to solve the unsolvable. The first rule of victory is to not fight battles that are already lost.

> Or that we should just let trash gather in our water-ways because eliminating all ecological footprints is impossible?

No. There is a difference between setting an impossible goal and setting a possible one. Cleaning water ways to a defined but non-zero pollution level is possible. It also has a cost. When the cost exceeds the value of the waterway, then the goal becomes unreasonable even if it is still within the realm of the possible. That simple pragmatic fact distinguishes a reasoned approach from the green radicals that I was referring to. The possibility that in the process of reaching for an impossible end one might happen to take a course of action that approximates the correct pragmatic approach does NOT justify the existence of the impossible goal (in this case, eliminating human ecological footprints).

> They aren't delusions, they are ends

Ends that can't be achieved are mirages. The fact that they are not real won't stop people from following them. And if a mirage happens to be in the direction that people need to go, they are apt to think that the mirage was real in a fashion when following it leads to their survival. That doesn't make it any less a delusion. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

> and maybe you should buck up, stop thinking you know everything and get a few before life bites you in the ass.

You lower the quality of the discussion, and shame yourself with such comments.

Battlefield 1 is fantastic. Here's my personal favorite two - books about guns. No, I'm not a gun nut, I just really like military history. The first one goes more into history, while the second has specifications and technical information. Both are really interesting and make a great conversation starter. The best part is as you can see, they're not expensive at all.

As for history, any of - the Smithsonian's - visual history books are fantastic.

A personal favorite of mine, though, is Timeline. It's a gorgeous art book with a timeline of human history. It really helps kind of put things in perspective, and while it's not photographs, the art is really well done and appealing.

As for mycology, check the website of major arboretums near you. I'm lucky enough to live near the Virginia State Arboretum, and they usually have contact emails and are more than glad to recommend books, activities, and even offer volunteer positions to help you turn your interest into a hobby. I'm not sure myself about fungi books, but your local arboretum (usually on a major university campus) or the Virginia Arboretum should be able to point you in the right direction.

For anything else, you can usually find good art books by googling (Subject) Visual History or Visual Compendium, Visual Compilation, Etc. Visual is usually the key word. Even (Subject) Visual Book usually nets some great results.

Buy Fighter Combat: Tactics and Manoeuvring. It is the PhD-level thesis on air-to-air combat. Eat it up. You will be heads and shoulders above your peers if you can demonstrate a solid understanding of the concepts in that book when it comes to recruitment time.

Also, keep in mind that being a fighter pilot isn't particularly glamourous. You get to fly the coolest jets in the world, but 99.9% of the time, when you're deployed, the flying is boring as shit. Naval aviators? Take off, bus to a tanker, get gas, fly in a racetrack for 3 hours, get gas, fly in a racetrack for 3 hours, fly back to the boat, land. Sleep for 8 hours. Do it again when you wake up. Every six days. For 3-4 months.

Watch Jetstream and Speed & Angels.

Get your private pilot's license, glider's license, or recreational -- whatever you can afford. The sooner you get yourself into a cockpit the better. At the very least, try and go up in a high performance prop that's capable of at least 6Gs and get the instructor to do a full aerobatic routine with +6/-4 load. Some people take Gs better than others; you'll want to know if you're susceptible to fainting or throwing up. (I knew someone at the top of his class at flight school, right up until they started doing G-loaded maneuvers, at which point he started hurling at around +3/-2. He ended up getting kicked out as he couldn't kick it.)

Get into fighter simulators like Falcon 4.0: Allied Force, or the new Falcon 4.0 release from Benchmark Sims. They'll give you a far better appreciation of what's actually involved being a fighter pilot than any book or movie. (Took me about two weeks of reading manuals and practicing before I was able to lock on to a bandit in Falcon 4 from BVR and shoot it down. Learning the concepts of fire control radar and subsequent operation of said radars will be very enlightening, and again, will put you ahead of your peers.)

Engross yourself in the details. Get obsessive. Read and re-read Fighter Combat. Know the strengths and weaknesses of every fighter/attack jet currently flying in every air force. Know what a high yo-yo is. Know what your beams are, and how to notch them. Know about gimbal limits. Learn about jammers.

Eat up as much information as you can. Understand every concept being discussed in this thread about BVR tactics.. Learn as much as you can about the F-22, F-35, China's J-20 and Russia's PAK FA. The latter two are going to reach IOC around the time that you'll probably be strapping up in a J-35. Read all of the articles here and be able to make informed decisions about what you're reading and how that fits into your world view..

Watch this video of an F-16 pilot evading six SAMs over Iraq during Desert Storm and make sure that's something you want to do with your life.

Buy FSX and the VRS Superbug. Learn how to fly carrier patterns. It's one of the most challenging yet rewarding thing you can do on a simulator. (You'll want a HOTAS setup for the best effect.)

Read Vipers in the Storm for a very technically-oriented account of one F-16 pilot's Desert Storm deployment.

Read the official CV NATOPS publications (google it). Download and read the Air Force's F-16 Air Combat Command 16v5 manual. It's just as juicy as Fighter Combat.

Pick the aircraft you want to fly and know everything about it. Cut out pictures of it and put them on your wall. Know the emergency red book procedures off by heart. Buy the cockpit cut-outs that students use to learn all the switches and memorize them. When it comes to recruitment time and they ask for your three jet preferences, put that jet down three times, because there's no way you're going to fly anything else. Just, nope.

Know about the 10,000 hour rule (google it) and start chipping away. Immersing yourself in the world of fighter pilots now will pay off in years to come. When it comes time for your recruitment interview in 3-4 years time, you'll be so far ahead of your peers that you should be a shoe-in. Make it clear during your interview that being a fighter pilot is all you want to do. Have a list of every single aspect you've learnt (like red pages, BVR tactics, basically everything I've mentioned here), and get them to quiz you on the hardest ones (or ask if you can demonstrate what you know about the hardest ones).

And whatever you do, don't ever visit this site: http://www.becomefighterpilot.com/fighter-pilot-video.html. I purposely didn't make it a link. It is absolute horse shit. I know, because I bought it. A year ago. (And I'm 30 and have long since given up my chances of being a fighter pilot, which I regret on a daily basis.) It basically consists of: "get good grades, be a good person, do your homework".

No tl;dr for you! Print this shit out and do everything on it. Ping me in five years when you pull your first break turn at corner speed.

...

Know what a break turn is and why you would need to do one at corner speed.

To add to what Ryan said, there are also a bunch of good books on the subject, most of which can be found for free.

John 'Lofty' Wiseman's SAS Survival Handbook is extremely comprehensive (around 600 pages) and very information-dense.

The US Army Survival Manual is also pretty good, but it's not as comprehensive or detailed as Wiseman's book.

Although it's more of a bushcraft book, Mors Kochanski's Bushcraft is extremely well done. His descriptions are easy to read, but fairly comprehensive, and are paired with detailed sketches and pictures.

Mainly, just go out and practice. You're already a capable outdoorsman, so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle. If you wanna take courses, just search around for courses near where you are, or maybe look at something like NOLS. Hope that's helpful.

I know how popular Guns, Germs and Steel is in trying to explain America's rise--by theorizing that geography and resources were the prime motivators to America's rise. But I find that explanation lacking given how many other places in the world have resources that rival the United States but which are not superpowers. (Otherwise, the world's superpower would be the nations of the Sub-Saharian Africa.)

I personally subscribe to Victor Davis Hanson's theory offered in "Carnage and Culture" (Wikipedia link), which proposes a different theory: that the western culture of individualism proves to be a very lethal one as more minds are permitted to spend more time thinking of more lethal ways to conduct warfare. Individualism also allows more minds to consider more ways to solve different problems--and ultimately (a) wealth is driven by knowledge (since a resource can't be exploited unless you have the know-how to exploit it), and (b) warfare is driven by both knowledge and resources provided by that wealth.

America, being better at the sort of individualism which spurs innovation (by allowing anyone with a good idea to try to peddle his ideas for money), has thus become a richer country per capita, and has a much more effective and lethal fighting force than any other country.

This is one that I referenced a huge amount while growing up;

https://www.amazon.com/Weapons-International-Encyclopedia-5000-D/dp/0312039506/ref=sr_1_12

It is pretty dated by now. However, if you are interested in the history of weapons and the beginnings of the firearm, it is a place to start. Once you find an epoch that interests you the most, using a guide like this one, you can start looking into more specific eras and types.

As with just about everything, guns have a deep and storied history and there simply isn't one source that will give you all the knowledge there is on them. There is A LOT of ground to cover, it might be best to use an overview like this one to decide what you will focus on. Guns are like any tool; people have adapted them throughout history for their own needs and because of this, you'll find that there is so much to know that you'll never learn it all.

My personal favorite gun subject would be the AK. I have about a dozen books about it from technical manuals, to pieces that absolutely condemn it, to pieces that treat it as a marvel like it were part of a religion, to pieces that give a general history about it with no discernible slant at all.

I hope you enjoy whatever you end up finding.

They might. They can't hurt, that's for sure, but how much they can help, I don't know.


I haven't the faintest how the Australian forces promote (I'm sure someone can attest to it here), but the USMC promotes up to the rank of Sergeant (E5) based on something called composite scores. A big part of that is the physical fitness test (PFT). Run fast on the PFT = higher score = quicker promotion.

The real world experience, and really just the age, would give you leadership in the USMC straight away. Let's say I get 4 new Privates First Class in the shop, The SNCO tells me, the NCO to take them around, get them checked in and squared away. If one them is your age, and the rest are 18-19, I'm going to pull the older guy aside, tell him what needs done and put him in charge. The others will listen to him, and give him a ton of shit no doubt, but they'll listen because they know his authority came from me, and mine from the SNCO and so on up the chain.

I saw lot's of situations like that over the years and they go one of two ways. First, the guy is ok with it and "shows leadership" which gets factored into his pro/con marks (his semi annual evaluation). Higher Pro/Con = Higher Composite Score = faster promotion. Plus that kind of demonstrated leadership gets recognized through official citations, recommendations for meritorious promotions, etc. (If the command is good of course. If the senior leadership is shit, everyone is fucked.)

The second scenario is that the old guy blows it, either because he's a retard and his several more years of life experience taught him nothing, or because he doesn't want to be in charge. I only saw that once though. Friend of mine was 28 when he enlisted, and had no desire to advance, he just felt the need to do his bit for his country and signed up. He just wanted to do his job and be let be, he was the exception rather than the rule though.

Regardless of the particulars of the promotions system there, a military culture (especially a western one; see Victor Hanson for a good reference), is a military culture and a lot of the basic principles would apply. So yeah, I'd say what you've got going for you would be more advantageous than harmful.

Bro there is an abundance of resources for information on the officer route:

Current as of May of this year

Couple years old, but still pretty good

Trimhopp went to SOAS and was offered an officer slot a while ago. Dig through this thread and his comments for some insight. He's not active on the sub anymore but I'm sure he'd be willing to answer questions. He's chill.

Breaking BUD/S: Nothing in here we haven't heard, but the author lays out the process pretty well. I'm sure some things have changed since the book came out, but it's a good resource.

u/77dude has a son who went through BUD/S as an officer. Maybe he would also be willing to answer questions. But inform yourself first OP so you don't have to ask anything you can Google. (Not being an asshole, just encouraging the "ask three before you ask me" rule I learned growing up)

In relative terms, this question has a rather broad scope, so I will attempt to answer it more broadly (albeit tactically) rather than on a case by case basis. I’m also going to narrow the scope a bit by focusing on World War II, although this should be (at least somewhat) applicable to The Great War as well.

The book Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering by Robert Shaw is likely the best codified and most complete book we have to date (in the public realm) on air to air combat - not just in the modern era but also in regard to guns-on-guns dogfighting (e.g. World War II).

Generally, though, being able to visually identify friendly aircraft and communicate with them would not only be a basic part of training but also understood to be absolutely essential to survival. Formation flying, especially (and the hand signals that go with it), would likely help train (or weed out) young pilots very quickly in regard to avoiding contact with friendly planes. (Here is the Navy’s FTI manual for T-45 Goshawk formation flying )

If you were a British Spitfire pilot flying during the Battle of Britain, for example, you would likely be able to readily identify friendly aircraft like the Hurricane, Mosquito, Blenheim, Lancaster, etc. relative to non-friendly aircraft like the Me-109, Ju-88, Stuka, etc.

Between visual identification and the need to communicate with (at least) your immediate friendly aircraft in order to have any realistic chance of success, the odds of being shot down by enemy aircraft were likely orders of magnitude more likely than colliding with a friendly one.

I don't have any fitness advice, but since you're considering joining BUD/S I thought I'd point out a book for you to read about the training.

The book is called Breaking BUD/S: How Regular Guys Can Become Navy SEALs by DH Xavier.

It's a very informative book about BUD/S, what happens during training, what to do before training, the different jobs there are, the difference between officers and enlisted, etc. It's also mixed with humor so it's even more enjoyable to read.

I thought I'd point it out because from the outside looking in, it seems like all SEALs are gods and they do things you never could. This book can really help you understand that they were once in your position and they're actually pretty normal guys. It doesn't matter if you are an accountant or mechanic, you can still be a SEAL.

Dick Couch also wrote a book called The Warrior Elite which was also very informative. Breaking BUD/S however was more enjoyable to read because it was so straight forward and had a lot of humor and funny analogies.

North Korea is absolutely safe in this case, because like you said America values lives. And this has being the rationale behind China's minimal deterrence policy during the cold war. Because, during the game between the Soviet Union and the US, have nuclear weapon means it will be used as a easy game board for whatever political gains as the risks always outweigh the benefits. This is the game North Korea is playing now, basically North Korea is China during the cold war.

However, if the said country does pose a real threat, there is little qualms about taking the nuclear option, if there is little risk of return fire. See US plans to wipe the Soviet Union off the map in 1945, while the US has the nuclear advantage and the knowlege that the Soviets will soon have them too. US plans for first strike during the cuban missile crisis, while the US still the advantage of European and Turkish sites, while the Soviet haven't fully brought up the Cubans ones yet. And last the Herman Kahn's excellent book On Thermal War, where millions of lives lost is just statistic and can be calculated and sacrifice to pressed for an advantage.

Now the question is, what is China's position now. Does America see China on the same level as Soviet Union. Even worse, during the cold war, it quiet clears in the west (and in some circles inside the soviet union), long run the west will win. As long as the west contain soviet aggression and check soviet advances, then victory will be assured. This idea is vocalize most succinctly in the long telegram. In fact, the most dangerous time for nuclear exchange was in the 1980s, when the Soviet Union is clearly losing and the fear was the Soviets would go for it and hope a surprise a counterforce attack will prevail.

China, it seems that China is on the trajectory to to eclipse the US in the next two decade in terms of economical, comprehensive national power and even military power. And China is seeming to chart its own institution, national policy and governmental ideology that's different from the West and would not to controlled or guided by the west (this make it very different from Japan fear in the 1980s). So essentially, China no longer a north korea, but more like the United States, and the United State is a bit like the Soviet Union, with its leadership position erroting, the doubts emerge both about her exceptionalism as well as superiority of its ideology.

The United State currently have counterforce capabilities against China, while China only have limited countervalue capabilities. Additionally, the US is confident about it capability of tracking Chinese submarines. This means while a surprise first strike by the US will not only completely destroy China, it will also have a resonable chance of destroying most of China's nuclear arsenal as well. The US missile defense system could have catch the few missile missed by that first strike, leave the US mostly unscached (and in the views of a confident commander, completely unscached) in such an exchange and permanently stop a force that could not be stopped in the future. With other rational and moral leaders in power, this is very unlikely, even though RAND just recently published war plans with China. But with Trump in power, he might just wonna make it a reality.

With China archiving MAD, this places the possibility of a winnable nuclear war with China completely out of the windows, and would ensure the relative peace we all had since the end of WWII. And it is a policy that will not ending up saving Chinese lives, but American ones as well.

Well the definitive guide would be Fighter Combat by Shaw. However if you don't want to shell out money, SimHQ has several good general guides on air to air and air to ground procedures that can be adapated to WT's bizzare style of fight.

Closer to home, I would suggest watching /u/dmh_longshot and /u/messer_smitt's videos. Longshot has a great series of videos showcasing effective energy fighting in arcade, the principles of which are applicable to RB as well. Messer Smitt is an incredibly effective, efficient energy fighter with a particular mastery of more subtle energy management techniques involving roll and forcing overshoots.

Hi there, I am not a professional naval historian (my master's was in American history, post civil war) but I have read quite a bit on the topic. Several books come to mind:

• I second the Massie recommendations. Here are Amazon links:
  
  http://www.amazon.com/Dreadnought-Robert-K-Massie/dp/0345375564/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1370960465&sr=1-1&keywords=dreadnought+massie
  
  http://www.amazon.com/Castles-Steel-Britain-Germany-Winning/dp/0345408780/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1370960472&sr=1-6
  
  
• The British historian N.A.M. Rodger has written two naval histories of Britain, which are very accessible. Rodger does a good job of balancing strategy and tactics with the political and bureaucratic matters that make a navy efficient.
  
  The Safeguard of the Sea:
  http://www.amazon.com/Safeguard-Sea-History-Britain-660-1649/dp/0393319601/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1370960428&sr=1-3
  
  The Command of the Ocean:
  http://www.amazon.com/The-Command-Ocean-History-1649%C2%AD-1815/dp/0393060500
  
  
• John Keegan wrote a short book, The Price of Admiralty, focusing on the naval battles of Trafalgar, Jutland, Midway, and the Battle of the Atlantic in WWII.
  
  http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140096507
  
  
• There are any number of books on Midway, but one that I enjoyed is Shattered Sword, by Parshall and Tully. They delved deeply into Japanese archives and reconstructed details of flight operations and naval SOP to illuminate the battle in a way that I had not seen before:
  
  http://www.amazon.com/Shattered-Sword-Untold-Battle-Midway/dp/1574889249
  
  And, of course, if you want fiction, both the Horatio Hornblower and the Aubrey-Maturin series are good reads. A-M is a bit more modern lit; Hornblower is entertaining but starts to read a bit older.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatio_Hornblower
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey–Maturin_series
  
  I hope this helps. When I get home I'll take a look at my shelves and see what else comes to mind.

Keegan's History of Warfare touches on maritime power, but his Price of Admiralty is very good, and much more focused on Naval history. If you want a great memoir of WW2 in the Pacific, I'd recommend With the Old Breed by Sledge although this is the Marines, not the Navy specifically.

Thank you for showing interest!

Here's a book concerning the battle of Poltava which was well received when it came out in Sweden.

The Battle that Shook Europe: Poltava and the Birth of the Russian Empire by Peter Englund

Myself I haven't read it but I am reading another book by Peter called Ofredsår and I love the book, but I couldn't find the English translation online...

Anyhow, good luck!

In addition to many of the other books that others have listed (namely Kissinger and Mearsheimer) I have listed a few other books that I would highly recommend reading.

And because you are interested in learning more about the Middle East, be prepared to read. A lot. The Middle East is a far more complex place than most people imagine and understanding the region requires a great deal of knowledge. I have been studying the Middle East for nearly a decade and I still feel like there is so much that I do not know. I would start by reading reputable news sources every day. Places like The Economist, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, BBC, Financial Times, are the Los Angeles Times are good English language news sources that you should look at. Additionally, I have written up a suggested reading list for learning about the Middle East, though it is a bit more security-related since that's my area of expertise. I hope it helps. And feel free to ask any questions if you have them.

Books - International Relations, Theory and Beyond

• Daniel Drezner - Theories of International Politics and Zombies. A creative and humorous book that seeks to explain the major IR theories in a manner that is easy to understand. Good for establishing a base understanding of international relations.
  
• Bruce Hoffman - Inside Terrorism. Quite possibly the book on terrorism. Written by one of the field's best scholars, this books provides the best introduction and overview on what terrorism is and its history over the past century. Just be sure to purchase the 2006 edition.
  
• Graham Allison - Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. An examination of the different levels of how decisions are made, using the Cuban Missile Crisis as a case study. Another essential book for understanding how different states, agencies within a government, and even individuals, can have major impacts on foreign affairs.
  
• Carl von Clausewitz - On War. One of the most significant books on understanding war in world; its frequently listed alongside Sun Tzu's Art of War. It is essential reading for anyone interested in military affairs and how it plays into politics. Though you only need to read the 1st ,2nd, and maybe 8th chapter, everything else is unnecessary.
  
  

  Books - General History of the Middle East
  

  
  

• Albert Hourani - A History of the Arab Peoples. This is widely considered to be the definitive book on history in the Arab World.
  
• Eugene Rogan - The Arabs: A History. Another essential and critically acclaimed book on Arab history.
  
• Roy Mottahedeh - The Mantle of the Prophet. Role of religion and religious figures in Iran before and during the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
  
• Mark Lynch - The Arab Uprising: The Unfinished Revolutions of the New Middle East. An outline of the causes, reactions, and consequences of the Arab Spring.
  
• Thomas Barfield - Afghanistan: A Cultural and Political History. Afghanistan is usually not considered a part of the Middle East in academic research, so I am including this one. It's probably one of the best overviews of Afghan History.
  
  

  Books - Middle East Military History
  

  
  

• Kenneth Pollack - Arabs at War: Military Effectiveness, 1948-1991. Probably the best book on Arab militaries culture and effectiveness and warfare in the Middle East between 1945-1991. Very extensive and informative.
  
• Steven Ward - Immortal: A Military History of Iran and Its Armed Forces. A well-written history of Iran's military, from the Safavid Empire to the 21st century.
  
• Ahron Bregman - Israel's Wars: A History since 1947. A terrific book outlining Israel's strategic decision making for its military operations since its founding as a country.
  
• Bruce Hoffman - Anonymous Soldiers: The Struggle for Israel, 1917-1947. A look at the establishment of Israel and the development of the current Arab-Israeli conflict.
  
  

  Books - Middle East Terrorism and Substate Violence
  

  
  

• Daniel Byman - Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and the Global Jihadist Movement: What Everyone Needs to Know. A terrific primer on al-Qaida, ISIL, and jihadism.
  
• Lawrence Wright - The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. Probably the best book for outlining the history of al-Qaida and why 9/11 happened.
  
• Michael Wiess and Hassan Hassan - ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror. One of several recent books on ISIL, this one provides an overview on the history and organization of ISIL.
  
• Barry Rubin - Revolution Until Victory?: The Politics and History of the PLO. Although a little old (published in 1996), this books does a great job chronicling the history of the PLO and its role in the Palestinian struggle.
  
• Ahmed Rashid - Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. One of the best books on the rise and fall of the Taliban.
  
  

  Books - U.S. Foreign Policy in the Middle East
  

  
  

• Bob Woodward - Obama's Wars. Outline of the U.S. foreign policy decision making towards Iraq and Afghanistan in the early years of the Obama administration.
  
• Kenneth Pollack - The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America. A good overview of tensions between the United States and Iran.
  
• Michael R. Gordon - The Endgame: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Iraq, from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. Follows U.S. strategic and political decision making process during the Iraq War and the U.S. occupation.
  
• Peter R. Mansoor - Surge: My Journey with General David Petraeus and the Remaking of the Iraq War. An extensive outline of the development and outcome of the Surge during the U.S. Occupation of Iraq.
  
• Steve Coll - Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. A widely popular and acclaimed book on U.S. covert operations from the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan until 2001.
  
• Mark Mazzetti - The Way of the Knife: The CIA, a Secret Army, and a War at the Ends of the Earth. An overview of the CIA's targeted killing program against terrorist organizations.
  
• Michael Morrell - The Great War of Our Time: The CIA's Fight Against Terrorism--From al Qa'ida to ISIS. Written by the former acting director of the CIA, this book examines U.S. counterterrorism successes and failures of the past two decades.

Purchase the US Army Survival Manual. It's full of information about first aid, tracking and trapping animals, navigating, improvised shelters and water collection methods. I keep a copy of this in my backpacking pack at all times.

Also, make and keep a bug out bag (again, this is my backpacking pack). It should contain basic survival items like a water filtration and purification system, first aid kit, versatile clothing, sewing kit, non perishable food, a weapon and appropriate ammo, a good knife, some para cord, topographic maps of the area you intend to retreat to and planned route to escape the city if you live in one.

As for being part of a group, develop a skill that is valuable to other survivalists. A simple skill that will come in handy would be sewing. Clothes and shoes will need constant maintenance in the wilderness. Learning some basic blacksmithing and would be excellent for making tools. Understanding the basic mechanics of a firearm and how to repair one would also be immensely valuable. Take at least take a CPR & First Aid course. Learn how to navigate in the wilderness and how to predict weather patterns.

Anything relating to very recent firearms is going to be fairly dated as things change fairly quickly in the world of firearms.

The way I see it, there's electronic media for learning about the latest offerings from Ruger or Smith & Wesson.

I'd say get him a nice reference book. Ian Hogg was a prolific weaponry author, and he had many books on pistols, rifles, machine guns, artillery, what have you, and most are still in print or easy to get a hold of.

When I was a kid, my middle school had this book in the library:

http://www.amazon.com/Weapons-International-Encyclopedia-D-Updated/dp/0312039506/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345619493&sr=1-3&keywords=weapons+encyclopedia

I basically had it checked out throughout fifth and sixth grade. It's a bit dated, but it's a fantastic read. I'm pretty sure I eventually bought a copy and have it somewhere in my garage.

Hermann Kahn's On Thermonuclear War & Thinking about the Unthinkable in the 1980s are still go-to texts for nuclear strategy.

The Parallel History Project is a good resource for Early to Mid Cold War era Warsaw Pact warplanning.

The CIA's Historical Collections contain declassified documents regarding US assessments of the WP and Soviet stances, The CAESAR, POLO, and ESAU Papers in particular.

For some interesting context, the GWU's National Security archive has some documents showing US intelligence failures.

Unfortunately, you will run into the secrecy wall really quick in this area, since nuclear strategy is more a political strategy, than a strictly military one, and grand strategy like this hangs around a good, long while (for example, I am not aware of any declassified Single Integrated Operational Plans).

The thing about BVR is that it isn't a science. You can learn all the maneuvers, nomenclature, and tactics, but at the end of the day BVR combat is about 40% luck and 60% art. I think what nealius posted is about the best you'll find outside of military practice. I always recommend Shaw's book but even his book is fairly light on the BVR stuff.

I guess a good way to put it is that the rote learning that most of us are used to gets you about 90% of the way with WVR combat, but with BVR combat it only gets you about 10% of the way. The only way to improve at BVR is practice every situation you can simulate.

• http://www.amazon.com/Boyd-The-Fighter-Pilot-Changed/dp/0316796883
  
• http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599
  
  These two are great, and the 2nd one is basically the bible for A2A combat. A lot of the maneuvers will not apply to zero-g space fighters, but the lessons you learn about firepower, awareness, and strategy will hold up for the next 500 years.
  
  PM me if you ever want help or advice. My Org is always looking for bright eyed recruits :-P

In depends. The military identifies three levels of war: tactical, operational, and strategic. Tactical is just as it sounds. Small units up to Brigade and Division level. Operational goes higher, division to corps, to Joint Task Force to Theater. Strategic goes from theater to national. The lines can blur, especially between operational and strategic.

In the Army, company grade officers (LTs and CPTs) focus on the tactical level in their training. Theoretically, all junior officers learn some degree of small unit tactics. Some company grade officer end up working at higher levels so they get a lot of OJT at the higher levels. That's what happened to me when I was a Captain assigned to CENTCOM.

Field grades (MAJ-COL) get trained at the operational and strategic level. These are the folks who write all the plans. They are also the ones who command battalions and above.

At the Colonel level, officers get training on the higher echelons of strategy or what some people might call "grand strategy". These are the guys who will write the big war plans.

There are schools at each level that teach officers how to do their jobs. Many officers also attend graduate school. That's where I'm at right now. (http://www.nps.edu/Academics/SIGS/NSA/)

As far as reading goes, it depends on what you're interested in. For tactical, books like "Band of Brothers" are timeless and great. "Thunder Run" is a good look at the early phases of OIF. For a look at the Operational/Strategic level, I'd check out "Cobra II", "Fiasco", and "The Gamble".

Most of the military publications and field manuals are open source. The Ranger Handbook is the best all around for small unit tactics. If you want to learn how the Army is set up, try FM-1 The Army (http://www.army.mil/fm1/) or the COIN manual. (http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf) For a look at how all the forces fight together, check out the Joint Operations Manual. (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_0.pdf) However, most of these are really dry and jargon laden.

If you want a good starting source for strategy and what has shaped strategic thought, check out "Makers of Modern Strategy". (http://www.amazon.com/Makers-Modern-Strategy-Machiavelli-Nuclear/dp/0691027641) You can also read up on some Clausewitz because we love our dead German military theorists in the Army.

There is an argument using evolutionary theory that agriculture was only adopted to increase group fitness at the cost of indivual fitness.

Lots of civilisation diseases started with the adoption of agriculture.

So there is the argument that agriculture made civilisation possible but at the cost of pure indivual strength and physical prowess.

There is lots of evidence that early agricultural societies had less than healthy members compared to hunter gatherers.

When you think about it, the indivual skills of a warrior in a large army is less important than pure numbers, most armies in the past were farmers called to war once a year, and yet the prevailed most of the time against nomad societies whos way of life made them formidable indivual warriors like the steppe people, just by numbers alone.

Edit:

If someone is interested where these theories come from, I recommend these books:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0452288193/ref=dbs_a_w_dp_0452288193

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0996139516/ref=dbs_a_w_dp_0996139516


https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Our-Success-Evolution-Domesticating/dp/0691178437/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=joseph+henrich&qid=1558984106&s=gateway&sprefix=joseph+henr&sr=8-1

https://www.amazon.com/Not-Genes-Alone-Transformed-Evolution/dp/0226712125/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=not+by+genes+alone&qid=1558984151&s=gateway&sprefix=Not+by+ge&sr=8-1

So layman can be a relative term... non-degreed but well-read amatuer all the way down to "never read anything related to this topic before", so with that in mind, "Makers of Modern Strategy" is a pretty excellent place to start, collecting essays from a number of notable experts and covering the evolution of military strategy over the past ~500 or so years.

Direct quote is from:
McCullough, 2015, "The Wright Brothers", Epliogue pp. 260-261

This is a great read, just came out.



Here are the Wright Papers at LOC: http://www.loc.gov/collection/wilbur-and-orville-wright-papers/about-this-collection/

Here's a few great reads as well:

• http://www.amazon.com/Birdmen-Wright-Brothers-Curtiss-Control/dp/0345538056/ (mostly later aviation/business years)
  
  
• http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Complete-History-R-G-Grant/dp/0756619025/r
  
  
• http://www.amazon.com/In-Cockpit-Inside-History-Making-Aircraft/dp/0061143812/
  
  
• http://www.amazon.com/Conquer-Air-Wright-Brothers-Flight/dp/0743255364/
  
  
  

Already a lot of good advice here, and I did see In Pursuit mentioned, so I thought I'd just help point to the source of the good theory.

1. In Pursuit: A Pilot's Guide to Online Air Combat by Johan Kylander. This is a free online publication. Can be bought as a print if you so desire, but the PDF is free.
   
   
2. Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering (the 1985 edition) by Robert Shaw. This is the bible of air combat, covering everything from the basic concept of "energy" and the different weapons available, all the way to group-vs-group and alone-vs-group combat, used as study material even for real pilots. You can't do better than this, and for 485 pages (if I remember right) it's a pretty darn cheap book. It is well written in all senses of the word, and understanding it will make it so much easier to learn from other guides and materials available. Can definitely recommend reading it.

Seaman ship in the age of sail is a good one.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0870219553?pc_redir=1395279573&robot_redir=1

The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor is marvelous aswell
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0486402207/ref=pd_aw_sims_1?pi=SL500_SY115
And if your interested about knots
The Marlinespike Sailor
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0070592187/ref=pd_aw_sims_6?pi=SL500_SY115

I haven't read this edition, but the Jane's guide is pretty good from my childhood memories!

I'd recommend using KB/mouse to be more effective. For immersion, joysticks are awesome but they cannot compete with manual gimbal aim. The gamepad is going to give you the worst experience in current implementation IMO.

I recently read a really great book on dog fighting. It deals with atmospheric flight, but there is a lot of great info in it.

http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1427749842&sr=8-1&keywords=robert+l+shaw+combat

Herman Kahn's "On Thermonuclear War" is a Wonderful (if dry) read. He was a badass, because when everyone else was talking OMG NUCLEAR APOCALYPSE, he was proposing timelines for nations restoring their prewar GNP. Can you imagine that shit? Sitting down and running the numbers for GNP? Anyway, the book's a fascinating read, and it's great to think of nuclear war as a "Now what?" kinda scenario, as oppposed to "everyone died".

This concept was actually a really big interest of mine in my graduate career (though specifically as it related to the Roman Empire). Peter Turchin has written some good and approachable books on how political instability rises as populations approach their maximum possible density.

​

His first book on the subject that reads very nicely: https://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-Rise-Fall-Empires/dp/0452288193

​

A short (though fairly jargon-y) article on these effects on Roman instability: http://peterturchin.com/PDF/Turchin_SDEAS_2005a.pdf

Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency - (2001) James Bamford

This was the first book I read about the NSA. Up until this point, I knew next to nothing about them. This book did a great job of showing the NSA's systematic crippling of industry encryption standards by infiltration, blackmail, exploitation, politics, etc. Their infiltration of RSA and attempted infiltration of PGP were some of the best parts of the book, as it showed that the NSA was looking beyond code breaking, and specifically at introducing mathematical weaknesses in standard encryption systems.

Confounding variable. The lack of a gun wasn't what caused the Navy's success, recognition of the value of proper ACM training was the cause of their success.

As an aside, I don't know what you do for a living in the Air Force, but I greatly enjoyed this book. https://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599 I haven't read it in many years, but it was a real eye-opener.

No book will prepare you for law enforcement, it has to be touched, smelled, heard, and seen. If you're already a cop then the best thing you can do to be better is to be a well rounded human being and books can help with that.

Here's the recommended reading from some of the prior threads I was able to find in the sub.

1. On Killing
   
2. On Combat
   
3. Emotional Survival for Law Enforcement
   
4. Intro to Criminal Evidence
   
5. Blue Blood
   
6. 400 Things Cops Should Know
   
7. Cop: A True Story
   
8. [Verbal Judo] (https://www.amazon.com/Verbal-Judo-Gentle-Persuasion-Updated/dp/0062107704/)
   
9. [What Cops Know] (https://www.amazon.com/What-Cops-Know-Connie-Fletcher/dp/0671750402/)
   
10. [Into the Kill Zone] (https://www.amazon.com/Into-Kill-Zone-Deadly-Force/dp/0787986038/)
    
11. Training at the Speed of Life
    
12. Sharpening the Warrior's Edge
    
13. The Gift of Fear
    
14. Deadly Force Encounters
    
15. The Book of Five Rings
    
    I've read a good portion of the above listed. I highly recommend Emotional Survival and going to see one of Gilmartin's talks if he's in your area. Below are a few of my personal suggestions.
    
    
16. Meditations
    
17. Blink - Not sure if I buy it, but interesting to think about.
    
18. [Armor] (https://www.amazon.com/Armor-John-Steakley/dp/0886773687/)
    
19. Iron John: A Book About Men
    
20. The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics
    

It's actually a quote from "Rules for Radicals". It's a must read for just about any politician worth his or her salt. It's basically a political warfare manual. Read that, "The Prince", "On War" and "The art of war" and you will have a pretty good understanding of what they are actually doing up there. There are several other books I'd recommend if you really want an understanding, but those are a good start.

That great river of books that sucks away my money says I should have a used hardback edition in about 10 days. I would not look for a book report for, oh, maybe 6 months or so. I'll repay the "favor" this way. A Short History of the World is perhaps bordering on fluff compared to what you recommended, but it is an overview that may lead to other research. Perhaps more interesting to me are a couple of offbeat ones by Tom Standage: A History of the World in 6 Glasses, and An Edible History of Humanity. They sorta slip interesting historical factoids into your brain without it seeming like your having to work at learning history.

Blackwater by Jeremy Scahill is a great look into OIF which is the most significant event to happen in the region in the 21st century.

His book Dirty Wars is also excellent.

Also, Legacy of Ashes

This is all super American centric, but there's a reason for that.

I got my undergrad in History (with an emphasis on Military History) and am working on a masters in Military History. My last class was Military Though and Theory, and we read Makers of Modern Strategy. I LOVED the book. Also, if you're gonna buy Clausewitz, be sure to get the Howard/Paret version.

Body of Secrets
is pretty good as well.

This book was a good read. These are the same tactics that have basically applied to fighter combat since forever, up to all aspect missiles, but excluding HOB missiles. There are great chapters on 2v1 and 2v2.

If you're looking to read it, the Howard/Paret translation is the most common and readable translation. It was originally published in three volumes, but it is one work and is published now as the full text. Avoid the Penguin translation or any abridgments unless you need some kindling. Here's a link to the Howard/Paret translation on Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/War-Indexed-Carl-von-Clausewitz/dp/0691018545/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1457787735&sr=8-2&keywords=On+War

If you're looking for old three volume editions as collectibles, good luck.

YS(also)K about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Von_Clausewitz - his book "On War" laid the foundations for the academic study of warfare. Many (many) years later, Herman Kahn wrote "On Thermonuclear War", an amazing book, as a follow-on.

For those interested in this most morbid of subjects, I can recommend:

• The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy
  
• The Utility of Force
  
• We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History
  
• and of course On Thermonuclear War.
  
  For an antidote, Joanna Bourke's superb Fear: A Cultural History may also be enjoyed.

Actually, it is the reverse. Saudi Arabia is acting on the behalf of the US. The US supplies all arms, targets, intelligence, logistical support, etc. Bush initiated covert operations in Yemen, using drones, special forces and agents. Obama continued these operations but determined that operations needed to be escalated to traditional bombing campaigns. President Obama felt that direct action by the US was not politically feasible so assigned Saudi Arabia to carry out the US's goals.

The book, Dirty Wars, covers this well and in depth.

I remember reading J.M. Roberts' A Short History of the World a dozen or so years ago. It was awesome because it really did keep it simple and you never felt like it bogged down anywhere - which must be an incredible task given the breadth of subject.

I would consider it a good primer or first read of world history. You can always find something more detailed or specific further down the road.

The best part is that it only has positive reviews.

We really have to jump on it and tell people that it is full of errors and Wiki/Website copied text

The books by Peter Englund are great, but unfortunately from a look at Amazon the only book available in English seems to be the one on Poltava. Not a bad start, but more narrow in focus than his other works. There are a few other of his books that are available in German if that is of any help.

A Short History of the World by J. M. Roberts. Praised by The Economist, some Christian association, NY Times, etc. Boring in parts (it's tough to get excited about Sumerian civilization) but overall very good explanation of human history.

http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-World-John-Roberts/dp/019511504X/ref=pd_cp_b_1

Try this one - https://www.amazon.com/Janes-Aircraft-Recognition-Guide-Fifth/dp/0061346195

I don't own it, I just like pretty much anything that flies. I was lucky enough to be birding in the Columbia gorge in central WA when an F18 came screaming downriver and rolled up over the canyon wall right in front of me.

In case anyone is wondering, it's a Rumpler Taube "Dove"

From "Flight- the complete history" page 71 (excellent book by the way, if you like aviation you should definitely buy this book)

> Instantly recognizable by its swept, bird-like wings, which warped for flight control, the Austrian Taube (dove) had its roots in the Etrich-Wels glider of 1907. Manufacture was initially licensed to Rumpler, and the design is generally associated with that company; although it's initial success as a reconnaissance platform in the early days of the war led it to be being built by Albatross, Gotha, and DFW.

> 100 HP Mercedes engine, 6-cylinder liquid-cooled
> 47ft wingspan, 32ft length
> Two seater with a top speed of 60mph

Thanks. Looking for other funny business...

If you're serious and want to learn more about OCS by gobbling up every bit of information you can to get an edge.

I can give you a decent primary source.

Costs you 17 bucks, and you will only read around 20-30 pages from the book.

(Feel free to read the rest to see how we train our SEALs and what makes them one of the best SoF units in the world.)

Breaking B/UDS

This book as you can tell by the title is not exclusively about OCS, but the man who wrote it does write about how HE got into OCS with a SpecOp Billet for the SEALs.

Which obviously is light years more harder to get into SEAL contract for OCS. But the process is somewhat similar and in the book he focuses 3 chapters about how to get into OCS, what requirements are and what they look for, how to be competitive and what to expect life to be after becoming an officer instead of an enlisted.

Edit: Clarification

Other things:

• Silver space blanket (helps in all types of weather)
  
• 250' of parachord (side note: make one of those survival bracelets . It gives you about 12' that is always on your wrist)
  
• Survival Tin (nice little back up: SAS Survival Tin)
  
• WetFire fire starters (stuff is awesome. Little piece all you need to start a fire )
  
• Monocular
  
• Signal Mirror / Whistle
  
• Multi-tool (SOG PowerAssist)
  
• Hand chainsaw (Here)
  
• Army Survival Book (FS 21-76)
  
  EDIT: If I get a chance I'll take a picture of my survival pack. People think I'm crazy but never hurts to be prepared.

Incidentally Cannae was the very first thing I thought of when I saw that episode of GOT. I kept thinking how alot of that scene is exactly how I envisioned the battle of Cannae in my head (only with Roman soldiers instead of Wildlings and Crows). I read a really good book a few years back called "Carnage and Culture" by Victor Davis Hanson which has an entire chapter dedicated to Cannae. The book very vividly describes how the Romans were encircled and then slowly were forced back as the circle drew tighter and tighter around them like a slowly tightening noose.

I am a history major. If I could time travel, there are two places in history I would definitely NOT want to wind up: The Somme (Either Side), and Cannae (as a Roman soldier).

Link to the book:
https://www.amazon.com/Carnage-Culture-Landmark-Battles-Western/dp/0385720386

Jane's books are a good thing to start with:

Like http://www.amazon.com/Janes-Aircraft-Recognition-Edition-Guides/dp/0061346195#productDescription_secondary_view_pageState_1415834288638

Recommended reading: Peter Turchin's War and Peace and War where he spends quite a bit of time discussing this idea originally from Ibn Khaldun.

I'd translate loosely as "socially cohesiveness" / "tribal loyalty".

If you're interested in Machiavelli's thoughts/ideas/impact on Europe (aside from his life), I'd recommend the article on him in the following book:

http://www.amazon.com/Makers-Modern-Strategy-Machiavelli-Nuclear/dp/0691027641/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323205096&sr=8-1

I'm not all that up to date on modern military theory since most of my knowledge is from military history and not contemporary theory (although the two are, as one would expect, highly intersectional) - I do read some modern war journals and listen to talks on modern war theory though, although relatively rarely.

I'm hardly an expert on the matter (although I'm fairly certain know enough to recognize when someone has no idea what they are talking about). I just read a lot in college, and sucked up whatever I could from the library. I also liked reading a lot of primary sources, including things like reports from field exersises/war games/intel reports/naval excercises. One time I even read the entire

One of my favourites was this book on inter-war German reforms during the Weimar era. Rise and Fall of the Great Powers is another favourite of mine (although I never got to read the whole thing, it's a fucking massive book and I never had the time so) - it's especially good if you want to see some of the economic factors of warfare and tracking them through history. Clausewitz' On War is a classic primer on military and is practically ubiquotous - but it's also old as fuck and is far more important for showing some of the roots of modern (in the broad sense of Victorian/post-Victorian, not 21st century) - treat it like you would The Wealth of Nations.

Off the top of my head, a couple reasons. One is closure rate would be way too fast for reliable missile tracking. There would also be issues with the difficulties in managing the mental calculations the pilot would have to go through in obtaining missile lock, engagement tactics, etc. For the details of all that is involved in air to air combat, I highly recommend the book Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering by Robert Shaw. It's practically the bible for air to air combat. Once you study that, you'll see why it's not practical, and pick up some good info to help you out as well in your combat flying. https://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599

Literature is often the preferred medium when conveying wartime experiences.

Some good literature about invasions of Russia are

War and Peace (duh)

Operation Barbarossa: Nazi Germany's War in the East (for those into WW2)

The Battle that Shook Europe (relevant to the meme)

So yeah, literature does have a lot to do with invading Russia :)

My personal go-to is the Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide. It's not 100% up-to-date, but it still has a picture of most aircraft you'd expect to see, and some that you will appreciate being able to identify down the road!

My favorite aspect is the proliferation of manufacturers of aircraft and components, the individual quirks and focuses their engineers developed.

Here's my recommended reading for the day

You want studies or a book?

One of the most profound books i have ever read is this on how states rise and fall. It's the most enlighting thing I have ever read, it changed how I view the world fundamentaly

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0452288193/ref=dbs_a_w_dp_0452288193

Its a popular book without the mathematical models behind it

Here is the mathematical version

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0691116695/ref=dbs_a_w_dp_0691116695

But its quite expensive and only available as hardcover but there should be a different version coming out soon


For the study on cooperation this

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0996139516/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1517513099&sr=8-2&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=Peter+turchin&dpPl=1&dpID=41Ux9xQvfIL&ref=plSrch


On cultural evolution this books makes an incredible strong argument

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0691178437/ref=dbs_a_w_dp_0691178437


On how religion influences pro social behaviour this

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0691169748/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1517513482&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=Ara+Norenzayan&dpPl=1&dpID=61TgLU80vIL&ref=plSrch

This reminds me of one of my favorite books growing up: "Weapons" from the Diagram Group.

http://www.amazon.com/Weapons-International-Encyclopedia-From-5000/dp/0312039506

https://www.amazon.com/Gun-Visual-History-DK/dp/0756695732

Well, at one point I was into books like these. GI Joe was another big influence.

These have what you are looking for:

[Empty Hand. The Essence of Budo Karate] (https://www.amazon.com/Empty-Hand-Essence-Budo-Karate/dp/3938305134)

[The Book of Five Rings] (https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1935785974/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499658891&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=the+5+rings+musashi&dpPl=1&dpID=51u6Mn5MaIL&ref=plSrch)

[Bubishi: The Classic Manual of Combat] (https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/4805313846/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499658987&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=Bubishi)

Hey, that's from Seamanship In The Age Of Sail! Here's a few other drawings that OP might enjoy:

http://imgur.com/a/gyvlj

Here is the Amazon link for anyone interested.
http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1374916106&sr=8-1&keywords=fighter+combat+tactics+and+maneuvering

If you're interested in the techniques behind this stuff, this is my favorite book on the subject: Harland's Seamanship in the Age of Sail.

It's worth owning if you're REALLY into it (or you do it for a job), but you should try finding it at a library or something. It's basically an owner's manual for an 18th century ship.

Here are some links for the product in the above comment for different countries:

Amazon Smile Link: this book


|Country|Link|
|:-----------|:------------|
|UK|amazon.co.uk|
|Spain|amazon.es|
|France|amazon.fr|
|Germany|amazon.de|
|Japan|amazon.co.jp|
|Canada|amazon.ca|
|Italy|amazon.it|
|China|amazon.cn|




This bot is currently in testing so let me know what you think by voting (or commenting). The thread for feature requests can be found here.

The DK Smithsonian books are quite good for visuals. These two may be up your brother's ally. The first one has a bit of everything while the second one is Military.

https://www.amazon.com/When-Earth-DK/dp/1465429409/

https://www.amazon.com/Military-History-Definitive-Objects-Warfare/dp/0756698383

Read the book, it's very good. https://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-Battlefield-Jeremy-Scahill/dp/156858671X

It'd take a book to answer your question in the depth it deserves. WWI represents a major turning point in how militaries used (and thought about aircraft). At the outbreak of the war, aircraft were used mostly as scouts and flying messenger boys. In the United States, for example, the Army's few aricraft all belonged to the Signal Corps!

Although initially regarded as "toys," by old-school military officers, scout aircraft quickly proved their worth. The Western and Eastern Fronts of WWI started off as swirling, mobile campaigns as armies rapidly marched into battle. On the ground, horse-mounted cavalry tried to sniff out the enemy. Above their heads, airmen put a modern spin on the scouting mission. In August 1914, one French spotter plane noticed a gap between two advancing German forces. Allied troops counter-attacked, halting the German advance and arguably saving Paris. But for one lone plane, the Great War mighy have ended very differently.

As the mobile warfare of mid-1914 gave way to trench warfare in late 1914 and 1915, aircraft became even more valuable. Cavalry, the armies' traditional scouts, couldn't penetrate the trench lines of the Western Front (the Eastern Front is still a more fluid affair at this point. Interestingly, future ace Manfred von Richtofen was a cavalry officer here at this point in the war).

Airplanes, and to some extent, observation balloons, could roam wherever they pleased. Two-man spotter planes soon combed the skies over the Western Front. Observers sketched maps and even used primitive cameras to take aerial reconnaissance photos. The intelligence they gleaned was vital. Before offensives, it helped planners discover enemy positions, particularly hidden artillery batteries. Those guns could savage attacking troops in no-man's land, so knocking them out with counterbattery fire was essential for a large-scale attack to succeed. For defenders, recon planes could spot enemy troops and supplies massing for an offensive, giving the defenders time to prepare a response.

Since one scout aircraft could indirectly do immense damage, more and more effort went into shooting down enemy scouts. Early air-to-air combat had an air of enthusiastic amateurishness to it. Pilots and observers brought aloft pistols, hunting vehicles, shotguns, and even a few machine guns. The tactics weren't terribly complex: Fly alongside your target and blaze away.

Eventually, people on both sides of the war started seriously thinking about how to effectively arm an aircraft. The initial Allied solutions are crude, but fairly effective. Some fit a Lewis gun to the top wing of a biplane so it fires over the top of the propeller arc. It's hard to aim, but its better than nothing. French mechanics fit heavy metal deflectorsi to the propellers of a few planes. It's an awkward solution, to say the least, but it's enough for pilots like Roland Garros to start rackin up a few kills.

Robert Shaw's book has the best publicly-available breakdown of Air Combat Maneuvering. It's very much worth a read.
https://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599

Guys, your love with this story only proves that either you are too ignorant or you think others are that way. There is a renowned book containing all the gory details on this topic.

http://www.amazon.com/Body-Secrets-Ultra-Secret-National-Security/dp/0385499078

That was a very interesting article. Reminds me a lot of some of the points made in Carnage and Culture.

How could there not be a mention of the true classic?

http://www.amazon.com/Thermonuclear-War-Herman-Kahn/dp/141280664X

Perhaps something like The Army Survival Manual? I know it has first aid, foraging, methods of getting water, and ways to build shelter.

Not so completely, or in the same way. Makers of Modern Strategy is one of the best single volumes on warfare through World War Two and the Cold War.

There are good books on the development of Civil War strategy, on Prussian strategy, on strategy between Unification and WW1, between WW1 and 2, but then things dry up. And there isnt one book that covers everything and every time period. MMS is a great book, and it covers everything (including Weigley's book), but its not as good. Its just all there really is thats comparable.

I'd switch out the Catcher in the Rye for this I have a copy and it has some real useful information. And no, it's not just for combat scenarios.

Well, it's worth remembering that the term "Tall Ship" refers to any traditionally-rigged sailing vessel, which covers hundreds of years of evolution in sailing technology, hence the mechanics of sailing, say, the Roseway, a 1925 Gloucester fishing schooner, are vastly different from sailing the Kalmar Nyckel, a replica of 1625 Dutch pinnace.

That being said, the best book I can recommend is Seamanship in the Age of Sail. It's a modern book, but based on contemporary sources, gives a very thorough explanation of how a 17th-19th century Man-of-War would have been rigged, sailed, and manuevered.

Wow, I read Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering back in the day; I'm guessing this kinda changes a lot of the maneuvers taught there. I remember trying to get the nose around on an adversary and not being able, this thing would have made it a piece of cake.

> I think humans have a natural aversion to violence, that just makes sense from a self-preservation aspect, I think the glorification of violence is something that is taught to us.


You have that backwards, violence is a base urge, it comes from instincts, a desire for peace has been in bedded through education and human conscientiousness.


Humans will also never change.


If you want a better understanding you could buy this book, I highly recommend it.

Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age Paperback – ed. Peter Paret
That's if you want something more academic that the usual recommendations of Sun Tzu or Clausewitz.

Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering https://www.amazon.com/dp/0870210599/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_zSRCCbRDCYX8T

This will serve you well.

This work?

Might be a decade old, but I don’t think there’s anything newer, aside from their primary product which is a whopping $1500. One day I’ll get to look inside one of these, but that day is not soon.

https://www.amazon.com/Janes-Aircraft-Recognition-Guide-Fifth/dp/0061346195

Also as to why they aren't being made anymore I'd venture the internet is the major reason.

jane's guides, and time / spotting

^This^ ...and Battle By John Lynn, The Military Revolution Debate: Readings On The Military Transformation Of Early Modern Europe Edited by Rogers, and Makers of Modern Strategy by Peter Paret

Makers of Modern Strategy

http://www.amazon.com/Makers-Modern-Strategy-Machiavelli-Nuclear/dp/0691027641

http://www.amazon.com/Military-History-Definitive-Objects-Warfare/dp/0756698383

Read this.

I've had this book over 20 years, and its still a go to.

https://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599

This one:

https://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599

Watch this and read this.

And practice... practice.... practice...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0870219553?pc_redir=1395279573&robot_redir=1

Also look up Seamanship in the Age of Sail

SAS Survival Handbook

US Army Survival Manual: FM 21-76

UST Learn & Live Outdoor Skills

Only the greatest story ever told.

Not remotely short, but still very informative.

The one i red was in turkish and had 750+ pages. This link has 700+ pages so i think this should be true.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691018545?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=0691018545&linkCode=xm2&tag=theclausewitzhom

Sorry for long wait :( i'm a sailor, couldnt check earlier.

Alright, check out crash laobis youtube channel, and if you wann learn some BFM check out this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCFMX5z-ed4

and this https://www.amazon.com/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599

Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering https://www.amazon.com/dp/0870210599/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_UC5yCbVE7KSBE

The only book for real and virtual fighters.

> Tu veux parler du gros ressort extérieur à la base du joystick ? Il n'est pas là pour éviter les petits mouvements ?

Oui celui-la, en fait sa résistance est non linéaire ce que fait que tu vas faire des mouvement largement trop brusques (tu perdra le retour au neutre mais c'est pas plus gênant que ça).
Et avec ces mouvements brutaux tu perdras de l'Energie et ça c'est moche en dogfight
go ici : https://www.helisimmer.com/tips-and-tricks/making-your-joystick-more-helicopter-friendly/


Si tu t’intéresse au combat aérien Je ne peux que te conseiller ce bouquin https://www.amazon.fr/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599 c'est simplement la bible

Also, if you haven't read VDH's Carnage and Culture - Landmark Battles in the Rise to Western Power you should. It's the antidote to Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies, which is foisted upon many in college.

> Si tu t’intéresse au combat aérien Je ne peux que te conseiller ce bouquin https://www.amazon.fr/Fighter-Combat-Maneuvering-Robert-Shaw/dp/0870210599 c'est simplement la bible

Ca se lit aussi pour du space sim tu penses ?

Shaw's "Fighter Combat".

A bible for any aspiring combat pilot.

The Collapse of Complex Societies

War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires

Historical Dynamics: Why States Rise and Fall

Genes, Peoples, and Languages

The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution

The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood

Forgot to also mention, I have about 3 copies of this in various locations. Incredible resource that has been of use plenty of times. Once, stranded on Short Key during a monster storm it was used as kindling for a fire (one of the reasons it is printed on untreated paper).
Seriously, go buy a copy now.

josieKM: ^^original ^^reddit ^^link

in the book dirty wars by jeremey scahill it is pretty clear that Al-Awlaki was forced to become an informant of some description. He is also used frequently as a person who allegedly motivates others such Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and others who face terror charges..

And they all seem to allegedly get their ideas from Inspire magazine which also has very doubtful origins (some journalists say CIA produce it). So its like when they want to prosecute someone they use Al-Awlaki + Inspire - I usually get suspect when I read those linked to someone.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/07/5-reasons-to-doubt-al-qaeda-magazines-authenticity/59035/
http://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-The-World-Battlefield/dp/156858671X

You can read some of the negative reviews of the book here.

This is right in my wheelhouse! My own expertise on the war in the Pacific is mainly naval, but yes, I know some good books about that!

I would recommend, first of all, Clayton James' essay American and Japanese Strategies in the Pacific War, located in Peter Paret's Makers of Modern Strategy, which provides exactly what you are looking for. After that, I recommend George Baer's One Hundred Years of Sea Power: The U.S. Navy, 1890 - 1990 (the relevent sections, obviously; not the whole thing) and Doug Smith's Carrier Battles: Command Decision in Harm's Way for a good overview of the US Navy's role in the development of American strategy, policy, and operations against Japan, as well as how interwar Navy PME influenced their thinking on these issues.

David Evans and Mark Peattie's Kaigun: Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1887 - 1941 is absolutely imperative for any kind of understanding of the Imperial Japanese Navy's strategic, institutional, and doctrinal shortcomings as they were eventually revealed during WWII. And I highly recommend Ron Spector's Eagle Against the Sun: The American War with Japan, which also offers excellent analysis on the comparative merits and shortcomings of Japanese and US naval strategy.

Gerhard Weinberg's A World At Arms: A Global History of World War II is a bit daunting (1200 pages!) but provides the single best overall review of the war, including the war in the Pacific. For a look at US Army strategy, I'd recommend the US Army Green Book Series on the war in the Pacific; these books were written by Army staff and historians in the decade or two following the war, and offer a perspective that is sometimes difficult to find in more recent works.

Whether the State Department is or isn't assassinating people isn't really up for debate. There has been ample reporting on the issue by both the human rights organizations and the U.S. press; hell, Diane Sawyer covered the issue of the drone assassinations on World News a few weeks ago, the ACLU is embroiled in a prominent lawsuit against the State Dept. over it, etc. A respected journalist has just released a well-documented book that will bring you up to speed on this, if you're interested, but at any rate, again, as pkwrig alludes, the State Department is assassinating people left and right, in several countries, several of the victims by now have been Americans, and that really isn't debatable.

The "Art of the Kill" video has already been mentioned so I won't bother linking it. It's a good, if very basic, overview of air combat in modern fighters. Other resources to look at, that are unfortunately not video:

• Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering This is the bible of air combat. If you only get one resource on air combat, make sure it's this one.
  
• n Pursuit: A Pilot's Guide to Online Air Combat This is also rather decent. Do be aware it is more focused WW2 combat than modern fighters. Most of it applies just fine, but a few things in here will get you killed in and against modern fighters.
  
• Stick and Rudder: An Explanation of the Art of Flying This isn't strictly about air combat, but it'll make you a better pilot. If you don't have the basics of flight down perfectly, all you're going to do is flounder around in the air during combat.

In addition to your analysis, I was under the impression that the Mexica people used their melee weapons for slashing instead of stabbing. It was the stabbing mixed with the brittle obsidian that caused the Aztecs to be inferior to the Spanish instakill stabbing steel.

Also there fighting styles were a different from their European counterparts.
>"Because Aztec warfare was designed largely to capture rather than kill, stone blades were sufficient against similarly armed Mesoamericans.

That quote is from a book I read last semester for a class.

Thanks again for doing this. Love 'em.

Currently: The Twilight War: The Secret History of America's Thirty-Year Conflict with Iran

After this I will probably read

The Bear Went Over the Mountain: Soviet Combat Tactics in Afghanistan

On War

Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS

The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11

Illusions of Victory: The Anbar Awakening and the Rise of the Islamic State

On Grand Strategy

A fellow on the combined defense discord layed out his recommendations for books on nukes, so I'll list them here.

On Thermonuclear War By Herman Kahn

On Limited Nuclear War in the 21st Century by Jeffrey Larsen and Kerry Kartchner

The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy, Third Edition by Lawrence Freedman

Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces by Pavel Podvig

Nuclear Statecraft: History and Strategy in America's Atomic Age by Francis J. Gavin

Eating Grass: The Making of the Pakistani Bomb by Feroz Khan

Prevention, Pre-emption and the Nuclear Option: From Bush to Obama by Aiden Warren

Nuclear Deterrence in the 21st Century: Lessons from the Cold War for a New Era of Strategic Piracy by Thérèse Delpech

Analyzing Strategic Nuclear Policy by Charles L. Glaser

Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes

Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb by Richard Rhodes

Nuclear Strategy in the Modern Era: Regional Powers and International Conflict by Vipin Narang

Building the H Bomb: A Personal History By Kenneth W Ford

The Logic of American Nuclear Strategy by Matthew Kroenig

Paper Tigers: china's Nuclear Posture by Jeffery Lewis

Arms and Influence by Thomas Schelling

…'Was interrupted while typing the reply above, yesterday, so here an attempt to complete it.

As described above, there were two schools of thoughts about the strategy of aerial warfare even within the USAF. Initially at least, the ideas by these two schools de-facto 'dictated' what the Pentagon then demanded the defence sector to deliver (over the time, the relationship between the two [the Pentagon and the defence sector] became something like 'mutual': i.e. the defence sector began exercising ever higher influence upon decision-making processes in the Pentagon.)

Cumulative results of this relationship, plus ideas about future air warfare were that the military wanted to fight a high-technology war, controlled from one point. Correspondingly, ever more complex, more advanced too, C3 facilities came into being: these were fed data from ever larger networks of sensors (early warning radar stations and other means of observation). Simultaneously, combat aircraft were packed with ever more navigation and attack systems (nav/attack), required to fly ever further and ever faster. The two were networked with help of data-links.

The GenStab in the former USSR actually followed in fashion. Already in the late 1950s, it developed a strong C3 system (or 'integrated air defence system', IADS) for the purpose of air defence of the Rodina ('Motherland') against attacks of Western bombers armed with nuclear weapons. When the bombers began receiving missiles that enabled them to attack from stand-off ranges, the GenStab reacted by ordering interceptors that would be faster so to kill bombers before these could deploy their missiles (that's what, between others, led to the development of types like Su-15, MiG-25 etc.). For 1960s, it envisaged the development of a similar C3 system on the tactical plan too, this time with intention of countering a huge number of F-104 Starfighters that were about to enter service with the NATO and expected to operate at low altitudes against targets in eastern Europe (that's what, between others, led to the development of types like MiG-23).

Meanwhile, the USSR was not only lagging in regards of developing the necessary high-tech, but could also not afford installing it into all of its aircraft. Indeed, Moscow couldn't even afford training all its pilots to the levels comparable to those to which the West was training its pilots. The GenStab's solution was to improve the sophistication of its C3 (i.e. systems supporting the same), but also increase the number of sensors feeding the data into it. I.e. it attempted to provide a C3 with superior targeting information, so to enable first/single-shot/single-kill solutions. The advanced C3 required no advanced interceptors and fighter-bombers: these could operate along orders from the ground, indeed, literally 'per remote control'.

Thus, instead of requiring combat aircraft that could, for example, take off, fly a combat air patrol at 200 miles away from their base while waiting for their targets etc., then shoot once, wait for result, and shoot again (if necessary) etc., their solution was to have 'no bullshit' combat aircraft: combat aircraft 'brought to the point'.

Along that way of thinking, there was no need for super-advanced on-board radars, not even for RWRs. All of this was 'unnecessary', because interceptors were not expected to search for their target, not expected to dogfight, not expected to get surprised by the enemy etc.: all the related issues were to be solved by the C3/IADS. Instead, the purpose of an interceptor was to scramble in reaction to a clearly defined target, rush to that target along a course computed from the ground, acquire the target with help of simple onboard sensors, kill it and return to base. Period. Similarly, their fighter-bombers were expected to fly relatively straightforward attacks on tactical targets close to the frontline: even single SAM-sites were planned to be blasted by nukes. Shortly after, other tactical fighters would nuke selected targets close to the frontline in order to enable their ground forces to breach the enemy frontline and advance deep (and fast) into the rear. Training on such aircraft was also much simpler (and, therefore, cheaper): in essence, their crews only had to know how to take-off, control the work of on-board systems, follow orders from the ground, and land.

That was 'all' the Soviet air force was expected to do, and, therefore, was also equipped to do. In this regards, and because the Soviets largely ignored experiences from diverse 'local wars', of the 1960s and 1970s, very little changed in the way they thought over the time.

The situation began to change only in late 1970s, due to the changes of the NATO's strategy, and then in 1980s due to experiences from Afghanistan. The former made the option of a conventional war in Europe possible (i.e. there was a chance of the NATO vs Warsaw Pact war fought without nukes): this in turn required different types of combat aircraft, capable of delivering a more powerful conventional punch. The second has shown that theory and practice are two different pair of shoes, and that no sophisticated C3 can suitably replace 'flexible fighter-bombers' (i.e. fighter-bombers having the sensors, endurance/range and speed necessary to, for example, re-acquire and re-attack their target with conventional weapons). Before the Soviets could realize all of their related ideas, they not only lagged ever more massively in the field of high-technology, or bankrupted themselves (partially due to the Chernobyl catastrophe of 1986, too), but also the Cold War came to an end, in 1989-1992 period.

On basis of this, here few direct answers to the original questions:

• For most of the Cold War, the task of a Soviet pilot/crew of a tactical fighter was different than that of the Western tactical fighter. Their primary job was monitoring the work of on-board sensors while following directions from the C3/IADS (which in turn was to supply all the information necessary for them to accomplish the mission).
  
  
• The idea was that Soviet pilots need not having the 'big picture': situational awareness was in the hands of the C3/IADS. The C3/IADS also knew the purpose of the mission: pilots need not knowing about the same; they only had to follow orders (how shall a pilot know 'better' than his superior commander about what exactly is his target?).
  
  
• No matter at what point in time, there was no big difference in regards of reliance upon ground control between the East and the West. Both sides needed the ground control in order to find their targets, i.e. initiate an engagement ('air combat') - and thus both sides had to follow their orders. It was only after that point in an engagement that there were differences: the Soviets expected to successfully conclude any air battle with their first blow, right at the start of an engagement.
  
  
• Correspondingly, the Soviet pilots were neither more nor less dependent on ground control than the Western pilots were. Their task was different: their task was to monitor the work of on-board systems, follow orders, deploy their weapons when said to do so - and not to waste their time (and fuel) with searching for target, dogfighting etc.
  
  Make no mistakes: the Westerners were seeking for exactly the same solution (i.e. one granting the opportunity to conclude an air combat right at the start, with the first shoot, first kill). It was only experiences from diverse 'local wars' (Vietnam, Middle East etc.), that taught them that there is a high probability that the first attack would miss; when that happened, the outcome of a re-engagement depended on on-board sensors, skills of the pilot/crew, aircraft performances etc.
  
  
• The GenStab was slow into realizing this, and drew its related conclusions only in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The result were such measures like attempts to turn the MiG-23 into a dogfighter (see MiG-23ML/MLD variants), and then to re-train crews - for example with help of the '500' series of exercises, aimed to teach pilots how to fly complex air combat manoeuvres.
  
  
• This proved a mammoth task, and was never fully completed (not until today). Combined with subsequent geo-political developments, the result was a massive stagnation (outright 'vegetation') in regards of further development of the Soviet - and the Russian - doctrine, strategy and tactics of air warfare ever since. Even as of the last three years (see Syria), they are still struggling to reach US/NATO levels from, say, 1991.
  
  Finally, an advice: do not try to gauge how the Soviets would (or should) operate their combat aircraft based on modern-day video-games. That is likely to end in a host of massive mistakes, and outright illusions. If you want to inform yourself properly about this topic, you might need books like On Target (strategic level of planning for the USAF), Russia's Air Power at the Crossroads and The Russian Way of War (the way the Soviets/Russians think about fighting wars, organization and planning), Fighter Combat, (tactical level) etc., etc., etc., or even Moscow's Game of Poker (for a summary of all of this, plus recent combat performance in Syria).

I am born and raised in America.

>It's not offense on countries with resources we deem valuable that's just a stupid talking point that has no merit.

Has no merit? http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081

>Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.

>I was initially recruited while I was in business school back in the late sixties by the National Security Agency, the nation’s largest and least understood spy organization; but ultimately I worked for private corporations. The first real economic hit man was back in the early 1950s, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., the grandson of Teddy, who overthrew the government of Iran, a democratically elected government, Mossadegh’s government who was Time‘s magazine person of the year; and he was so successful at doing this without any bloodshed—well, there was a little bloodshed, but no military intervention, just spending millions of dollars and replaced Mossadegh with the Shah of Iran. At that point, we understood that this idea of economic hit man was an extremely good one. We didn’t have to worry about the threat of war with Russia when we did it this way. The problem with that was that Roosevelt was a C.I.A. agent. He was a government employee. Had he been caught, we would have been in a lot of trouble. It would have been very embarrassing. So, at that point, the decision was made to use organizations like the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. to recruit potential economic hit men like me and then send us to work for private consulting companies, engineering firms, construction companies, so that if we were caught, there would be no connection with the government.


Or how about this book? http://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Wars-The-World-Battlefield/dp/156858671X

>America's hand is exposed in this sprawling investigation of autonomous US military operations and the abuse of executive privilege that escalated global war. New York Times bestselling author Scahill (Blackwater) pulls no punches from right or left in his exposure of governments that passively authorized the use of torture in interrogation, marked an American citizen for death without due process, and empowered a military branch to conduct warfare on their terms, turning at least four countries into warzones. Interviews with U.S. army colonels, former CIA officers, Somali warlords, and a Yemeni sheik are only a few focal points in Scahill's narrative prism. Years of ground investigation are chronicled in stock terms, creating an accessible and shuddering effect: congress "asleep at the wheel;" an enemy of the state "on a collision course with history;" government officials who "cut their teeth" in the White House. Even in Scahill's most frustrated moments fact supplants editorial, adding valiancy and devastation to his brutal portrayals.


Your view of America is unrealistic.. or you haven't been paying attention.