Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
That you say the Principles of Defence "should be considered by anyone siting a position or emplacement that may need to be defended" actually indicates that we agree.
Never said I disagreed with anything other than your assertion "That I suppose should read "The Principles of the Defense should be being used." I simply said my statement was what I meant, then agreed there should be considered in all things defensive or potentially so...
...but does that mean that one throws all existing doctrine out the window? Of course not what it means is that in siting such a position under a given set of circumstances (enemy capabilities or METT-TC) "military judgement" is applied to how best to site the position.
True.
That said now please explain to me which of the Principle of Defence can be ignored:

Offensive Action
All Round Defence
Depth
Mutual Support
Concealment
Deception
Striking forces
Give me the map, a troop list, the principal locations, the assessment of the enemy (broad based, don't need a detailed OB workup...), log and perstats -- all that OpOrd / METT-TC stuff and I'll be happy to do so.

Lacking that I'll quickly point out that in most COIN / FID situations, Depth (classic type) is neither available or required, Concealment may be undesirable or even directed to not be applied in some cases and mutual support is rarely achieved or available...