Leading In Times Of War Analysis
Leading in Times of War
When turning on the television, reading an article, or listening to the radio, what mostly is being said is something good or bad of what a leader has done. Every leader has their good side and their bad. Everyone always looks for the intentions that a leader can give out. Presidents will explain what they would do if war was to happen. Leaders should not want war like Machiavelli did and think more about peace about like Lao-Tzu.
Lao-Tzu believes that war, violence, and weapons are not the answer. He states that “weapons are the tools of violence; all decent men detest them”(Lao-tzu 19). He is trying to say that if one is a good man, one will not make themselves comfortable around weapons. He believes that if a person likes or be ok with war and weapons, then those people are not to be trusted. He is more about being at peace with is people. As a leader, he thinks everyone should not worry about going to war or being prepared. He states “weapons are tools of Violence; all decent men detest them” (Lao-Tzu 19). He believes everyone should hate them because violence will not resolve anything. With war what …show more content…
He believes that everyone should be ready for any attack or for him or her to be able to defend his country. Machiavelli says “… in peacetime he must train himself more than in time of war” (3). What he is saying that the peacetime that is given, they are to be training the most. He believes that a leader should have his soldiers ready for action. He would train with them daily. He set up multiple training stations to know their way in and how to escape difficult traps. Machiavelli as a leader would have them well trained because he knows at any moment any one would attack him. He rather is feared than loved, so that would only make many people hate him. He would act like he showed interest in his people but only did that so people would be on his side during times of
When turning on the television, reading an article, or listening to the radio, what mostly is being said is something good or bad of what a leader has done. Every leader has their good side and their bad. Everyone always looks for the intentions that a leader can give out. Presidents will explain what they would do if war was to happen. Leaders should not want war like Machiavelli did and think more about peace about like Lao-Tzu.
Lao-Tzu believes that war, violence, and weapons are not the answer. He states that “weapons are the tools of violence; all decent men detest them”(Lao-tzu 19). He is trying to say that if one is a good man, one will not make themselves comfortable around weapons. He believes that if a person likes or be ok with war and weapons, then those people are not to be trusted. He is more about being at peace with is people. As a leader, he thinks everyone should not worry about going to war or being prepared. He states “weapons are tools of Violence; all decent men detest them” (Lao-Tzu 19). He believes everyone should hate them because violence will not resolve anything. With war what …show more content…
He believes that everyone should be ready for any attack or for him or her to be able to defend his country. Machiavelli says “… in peacetime he must train himself more than in time of war” (3). What he is saying that the peacetime that is given, they are to be training the most. He believes that a leader should have his soldiers ready for action. He would train with them daily. He set up multiple training stations to know their way in and how to escape difficult traps. Machiavelli as a leader would have them well trained because he knows at any moment any one would attack him. He rather is feared than loved, so that would only make many people hate him. He would act like he showed interest in his people but only did that so people would be on his side during times of