Armies decline after winning a war?

[MattC86]

Phew, How long have you got?

I was thinking we could get a debate of epic proportions going here, with expert witnesses and a few mud-flinging doctoral theses written. . .

First thing to remember was that the Tank Corps were full of Fuller supporters, and Swinton, Martel and Hobart were all in full swing. Read JP Harris "Men, Ideas and Tanks," for a pretty sound account of what actually happened.

Basically, I think they lost the plot. I think "Tanks" blinded them to some of the realities and "deep strategic penetration" was only ever going to be a pipe dream. Fuller and LH all drank their own bathwater. VI Germains pointed out that "mechanisation" was nothing new and it had to be rationally applied, and not over sold. - in contrast the Germans had no avant garde and came up with generally sound methods, based on experience and experimentation.

I wouldn't argue any of this - but wouldn't it be a rare moment indeed when an Army becomes unprepared for the next war because it went too far in developing new theory, equipment and methods? (At least within the realm of conventional warfare - US or IDF issues with tensions between maneuver warfare and COIN not included) I feel the Army in Decline concept is strongly linked with the "fighting the last war" theory, and all the tank advocates you describe were pushing strongly for major changes from the Great War. While they're predictions and prognostications may not have been entirely accurate, I still am not sure that pushing for mechanisation and promoting the tank - however "avant garde" their proposals may have been - had a major role in the May 1940 defeat.

- plus, point to note, the UK probably had the greatest proportion of Tank advocates anywhere in any army - yet we failed to produce any useable doctrine or even a good tank!

Indeed, yet despite all those advocates, the British Army still swung the gate into Belgium in 1940 to solidify the Franco-British line and return largely to Great War static conflict. I still equate this with blaming the revolutionaries for the problems of the masses.

Regards,

Matt