The Clausewitz Collection (merged thread)

[M.L.]

I'm going to leave most of your comments alone since we've been there and done that, and I sure no one wants to rehash deeply entrenched positions (least of all me).

That is simply not true. King George actually warned his staff that if German success continued, "we may have lost the war."

King George hardly seems like right fellow to give a professional military appraisal of the situation.

In fact, continued German tactical success paradoxically weakened their position by extending their lines and creating salients without any operational gains. Another case for linking tactics to strategy - failure to do so can turn tactical success into strategic failure.

Luckily the whole offensive was very badly planned in terms of exploitation, and had almost no reserves to replace very high casualties - which is why it failed. Had tactical success, such as that seen in the first 36 hours continued, they would have knocked the UK out of the war.

Sounds like a lack of operational planning to me!

As I suggest? Sorry 800 years of written military thought say they are linked as do 5,000 years of recorded Military History.

Since operational warfare emerged in the Napoleonic wars and came into its own in WWI, it follows that you wouldn't find much written about it. This is like saying "There is NOTHING about this nuclear weapon crap in almost all of recorded military history!" Yeah, well, it's sort of a RECENT concept you see...

"Operational Objective"? So basically you mean "objective".

No, I really do mean operational objective, i.e. an objective reached by a series of tactical actions which produces an operational or strategic effect.

This is after the fact justification of the worst sort.

Some call it history...

[slapout9]

This is like saying "There is NOTHING about this nuclear weapon crap in almost all of recorded military history!" Yeah, well, it's sort of a RECENT concept you see...

Spilled a lot of coffe over that one