Author Topic: For the at Home Generals... (Read 530 times)

BlckMgk · « **on:** March 07, 2003, 08:17:03 AM »

If you were lets say a General/Ruler/Emperor/King (whatever) of an armed force, and had a chance to attack an enemy's force. Where would you attack? With the knowledge, they have plans to attack within the month but you have the knowledge of enemy force strengths in different locations. Don't take into consideration any other extraneous factors, i.e. terrain, frontline composition, capabilities/training of forces to be engaged, just the following:

Would you attack the strongest point? Or the Weakest?

By point, I mean force #'s, and/or armor strength, and support from artilery, and air support.

Or what would be your strategy?
Also If I failed to take something into consideration please point that out.

Thanks for your time,
-BM

Ripsnort · « **Reply #1 on:** March 07, 2003, 08:31:32 AM »

Weakest point to get to their rear area where the supply line is...from two sides is better (Pincer)

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #2 on:** March 07, 2003, 08:40:30 AM »

Always attack the enemy where he is weakest and you can bring the most amount of force to bear.

SLO · « **Reply #3 on:** March 07, 2003, 08:47:34 AM »

hmm do you have more or less then the enemy?....

soldiers that is....

hmm what weapons did ya bring?

hmm what kinda soldiers(specialist) do you have?

hmm any air support?

you cannot plan an attack without intell.....rips idea of a pincer is smart....but again....the enemy EXPECTS you to attack weakest points.....

your takin intell out of your question...then it becomes useless to answer....

vorticon · « **Reply #4 on:** March 07, 2003, 08:51:00 AM »

i wouldent attack first...id prepare for his attack and start sneaking my soldiers behind what will be his line while still holding a midstrength defence force...then when the time is right i will take down his capital while his entire army is off trying to kill me...

Saurdaukar · « **Reply #5 on:** March 07, 2003, 09:01:24 AM »

Hehe, so many intensely detailed plans.

They all go south at first contact. Keep It Simple Stupid.

In addition - never defend if you can manage - if you stay on the attack you maintain the inititive.

gofaster · « **Reply #6 on:** March 07, 2003, 09:02:22 AM »

You guys are thinking in terms of "Stratego" and completely ignoring the use of guerilla warfare, air cav, covert ops, nukes, and satellite warfare. You might win a battle, but you can't win a war by simply holding a line.

Mini D · « **Reply #7 on:** March 07, 2003, 09:06:43 AM »

The strongest front can be decimated from the air. Its not what I'd be worried about. Its always the areas of "light resistance" that seem to cause the most trouble.

MiniD

Rockstar · « **Reply #8 on:** March 07, 2003, 09:07:14 AM »

The attack should be like a soap bubble, which distends itself until it bursts.

believe it or not that supposedly came from von Clausewitz

ygsmilo · « **Reply #9 on:** March 07, 2003, 11:01:10 AM »

"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting"

Sun Tzu

"All warfare is based on deception"

Sun Tzu

Animal · « **Reply #10 on:** March 07, 2003, 11:02:27 AM »

Helms Deep

Curval · « **Reply #11 on:** March 07, 2003, 12:26:01 PM »

I would do what the Americans did in 1990/91. Hit command and control first...don't know if that is considered weakest or strongest.

Habu · « **Reply #12 on:** March 07, 2003, 01:09:33 PM »

You know I think this war is going to go like this.

Saddam will take all his most loyal troops and put them in Bagdad in the city itself. He will create many rings of defense so it one ring is lost they fall back to the next. He will put his expendable troops near vital installations like power plants etc.

He will expect to lose his regular army troops quickly as they are not that loyal and will surrender at first chance.

Thus the US will have an easy time at first.

However when it comes time to take Bagdad they will have to street fight and the troops in the city will not be vunerable to air power as if it is used innocent civilians will die.

Thus the war will stalemate.

If Iraq's revolt then the war will end quickly.

I see the US isolateing Bagdad for months but not moving in to finish him off. The will just sit tight till he surrenders.

Of course that is why they want the El Samude missles destroyed. They know that if they are camped out around Bagdad then he could launch biological weapons at them with these.

miko2d · « **Reply #13 on:** March 07, 2003, 02:09:14 PM »

Habu: Of course that is why they want the El Samude missles destroyed. They know that if they are camped out around Bagdad then he could launch biological weapons at them with these.

That is nonsense. If they are camped around Bagdad, Hussein would not need huge missles with a 150-mile range launched from trailers that do not fit in a city street to hit them with biological weapons. He would just send a few volunter guys or better yet teenage girls with spray cans. That is of course if he has them and has any intent to use them.

miko

Rockstar · « **Reply #14 on:** March 07, 2003, 02:12:17 PM »

LOL Habu, just the way CNN and those other talking heads said it would happen eh?