I'm gratified to see that I'm not the only one with some misgivings about this article.
=
As a civilian lifer I'm loath to critisize those who have or are serving in uniform. But this article seems (to me) to have several serious mistakes and/or unfounded conclusions that aren't supported by a casual glance at the historical record.
=
MCDP-1 is far from the only USMC manual and is pretty clearly part of an entire spectrum of such manuals. Is there a reason this manual was cherry picked out of that spectrum?
On pg5 Owen claims that Liddell-Hart "denigrated" the importance of Allenby's Palestine campaign, yet Liddell-Hart thought highly enough of Allenby and the Palestine Campaign to include them in a chapter of their own in his 'The Real War 1914-18' and Liddell-Hart wrote glowingly of Allenby in the aformentioned chapter.
To Wit;
"When full deduction is made for the advantages conditions of September 1918, the conclusion remains that the triumph immortalized by the already immortal name of Meggiddo is one of history's masterpieces by reason of breadth of vision and treatment. If the subject was not a difficult one, the picture is almost unique as a perfect conception perfectly executed."
-B.H.Liddell-Hart
Those are simpily not words of "denigration" by any definition or standard.
===
On a personal bias issue I have an issue with anybody or anything that quotes John Mearsheimer as an authority on anything beyond obtaining Saudi oil money grants for a university.
If we're going to rehabilitate Foch (who clearly seems to deserve it, as clearly his students do not), is it possible to do so without it being at the expense of Liddell-Hart (whose concepts have proven themselves over and over again), and without resorting to the veracity challenged (Mearsheimer) as a voice of authority?
===
On the conclusions...
I offer the Blitzkrieg (1939-41), The Israeli Six-Day War, and Operations Desert Storm, and Iraqi Freedom as examples of "manoeuvre warfare."
I offer Kursk, Stalingrad, Dien Bien Phu, Khe Sahn, and Grozny '95 as "attritional warfare."
Von Falkenhayn's "Bleed the French White" qoute is not of the MV school of thought, whatever that school may be determined to be.
["The purpose of manoeuvre is to gain position of advantage relative to an opponent. This advantage may be used to deliver overwhelming violent attrition."]
Not manoeuvering means fixed defenses, which may or may not have advantage relative to an opponent. This advantage may also be used to deliver overwhelming violent attrition.
- or the opponent could withdraw, surrender, just fade away, or all three.
EQUALLY
ASYMETRICAL,
R
Bookmarks