If somebody wanted to teach themselves how to become a capable military commander, what would be the best way to go about it?
Please note, when I say commander, I mean someone who can plan campaigns, has a strong grasp of logistics and supply chains, is skilled in both tactical and strategical thinking, and preferably have an understanding of basic statecraft.
I have been largely focusing on contemporary Guerilla leaders such as Võ Nguyên Giáp. I also have been delving into the histories of Caesar, Guderian, Alexander, Subotoi, and anyone else who strikes my fancy.
Thank you for your help or anything you may add
Play Hearts of Autism 3 for seriously epic micromanagement of armies, economic policy and political outcomes.
Read Clausewitz.
If guerilla stuff floats your boat, read Mao, he literally wrote the book on it.
I'd love to know this too, anyone care to add their advice?
>>29465168
>be rich
>be son of a rich guy
The key to being all of those is to not be all of those. You have subordinates for a reason.
>>29465168
>plan campaigns, has a strong grasp of logistics and supply chains, is skilled in both tactical and strategical thinking
Westpoint makes all the officers they groom go through most basic training so they get a first hand experience on how deployments are conducted and what is needed.
>have an understanding of basic statecraft.
Read the Prince by Machiavelli - its pretty dark but probably needed if you plan on grooming a capable military commander and state actor but again first hand experience is probably the most important.
>>29465168
Fucking Scipio. So underrated.
>inb4 muh hannibal
War gaming
But you'd need the real deal that is refereed by pros.
>>29465168
My best guess would be to study political science in university, then join the military as an officer? But be wary of social "sciences", they're usually chock full of lefties.
>>29468970
>study political science in university
nope. Poli sci at most teaches you about IR security and government institutions with regards to politics. You're thinking of strategic studies.
>>29465168
>>29465536
>can plan campaigns
>is skilled in both tactical and strategical thinking
You are not going to get that outside of being an officer that is participating in planning actual combat missions. You are not going to be competent at the former without understanding the basic functionality of each weapon system available.
>has a strong grasp of logistics and supply chains
There is a business major for this, I don't remember what it's called, but it's tied with quantitative analysis and is one of the few not-useless majors in the business colleges across the country. It might be called just what you asked about. It's heavy on stats and optimization via software like Excel's Solver.
>and preferably have an understanding of basic statecraft.
Understand how government works.
>I also have been delving into the histories of Caesar, Guderian, Alexander, Subotoi, and anyone else who strikes my fancy.
The tactics are no longer applicable. At all.
Also this: >>29465182
>>29466641
This to be quite honest. Unless you are a titanic military talent like Napoleon, you're probably better of sticking to one specific skill and honing a keen eye for strong and reliable talent in other areas.
>>29468970
>beware of different viewpoints
>in a university
What is the point? You should go in with an open but very skeptical mind.
Self education.
Start reading Milatary bios, campaign histories, diaries.
Geography. History. Economics as general subjects.
Pick a battle from history, recreate it as a wargame and play it the way it happend. Than play one side and try to change the outcome. Play the other side as well.
Repeat.
Repeat.
When you can will a lost battle with only the sesources the original commanders had its time to try against another human.
It does not matter what or where, Warcraft, computer sims, table top, you just have to play people better than you are.
