2400 years ago Chinese general and military thinker Sun Tzu created his famous The Art of War which summarize eternal laws of military strategy, leadership and waging of a warfare. His language is naturally archaic now but his rules are still actual, proven by thousands wars and battles. USA, in their utter arrogance ignore these rules, living in their own military mythology based on myth that brute power is everything in any war. Full text (English) of The Art of War you can find eg. at http://ift.tt/wQDMB6 You may go through and tick one point after another. Few examples: Sun Tzu says: I.18. All warfare is based on deception. - So why they cry Putin is not telling them full truth... I.19. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. - Russian army are incapable drunkers, are not? You can imagine who is spreading such ideas and for whose good... I.20. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him. - Slavyansk was good bait, wasn't. Ukies and their masters lost war owing to bombastic idea of "Impudent Strelkov, challenger of our Empire, finally in cage!" I.22. If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. - Mother Russia thanks for McCain and similar no-brainers... Putin is a judo master, he knows how to use opponent's energy of vicious agression... I.24. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected. - Americans have strange habit to be absolutely predictable. They are talking about sanctions months ahead their putting in force, they are talking on types of weapons they want to deliver to Ukraine... III.1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them. - The physical destruction of enemy army after it surrended is strange American hobby. Look at Iraq... III.2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. - Don't say it to McCain... III.3. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities. - Walled means defended now. Stupid sieges of Slavyansk, Gorlovka and Luhansk already brought their fruits, attacking army is utterly demoralised, defenders have long queues front their recruitment offices. III.5. The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain, while the town still remains untaken. Such are the disastrous effects of a siege. - Looks like Sun Tze was in Donetsk aeroport:-) III.12. There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army:-- III.13. (1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army. III.14. (2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds. III. 15. (3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers. - Commanding the army to sit calmly in cauldron was obviously beyond Sun Tzu's imagination... VI.5. Appear at points which the enemy must hasten to defend; march swiftly to places where you are not expected. - For some reasons, Americans always attacks places where they are expected for months. VI.17. For should the enemy strengthen his van, he will weaken his rear; should he strengthen his rear, he will weaken his van; should he strengthen his left, he will weaken his right; should he strengthen his right, he will weaken his left. If he sends reinforcements everywhere, he will everywhere be weak. - US military still tries to be strong (even strongest) everywhere. Predictable fail. etc. etc. What are roots of such strategic incompetence of US military? Probably in the fact that US military doesn't exist for purposes of waging war but for purposes of weapon manufacturers profits. Quickly won wars are not in their interests, they need stupid prolonged, bloody, material demanding wars, the very opposite of Sun Tzu's effective low cost high thinking war.
from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1zKZBkr
v
from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1zKZBkr
v
How USA ignore laws of strategy
Views:
0 comments:
Post a Comment