Re: [GZG] [OT] Books (Weber/White/Meier)
From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@g...>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:55:39 +0300
Subject: Re: [GZG] [OT] Books (Weber/White/Meier)
On 7/22/08, email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Yeah, I'd have to say Good fighting only wins out over economy when
> differences in economies between the two parties is close or marginal
> best. When ou have a vast gap in economies, the economic giant can
> throw crappy soldiers and equipment against the enemy. I mean, both
> Russians and Americans in WW2 prove this and I invite anyone to try to
> a way against the Chinese and see how goo your excellent fighting
> to an army that can be a billion strong if it needed to be.
While the Russians were inferior on the tactical level, their
operational and strategic leadership was massively superior to the
German's. Which is why their production was able to be brought to
bear effectively. The Germans were out-generalled. At no time did
the Russians put more than twice the number of bodies the Germans had
in the front line. Which shouldn't be enough to steamroll over an
allegedly superior enemy with sheer weight of mindless untermensch.
That image is taken directly from Nazi autobiographies after the war.
As for the Americans, I would argue that they outfought the Germans in
nearly every engagement of the war after Kasserine. And had they
fought as poorly as they did at Kasserine, it wouldn't have mattered
how many bodies they could throw into the fight. You can attempt to
argue that this is weight of firepower--but that's superior combined
arms doctrine, not merely weight of numbers. We also, except for a
handful of categories, had better equipment. Hate to break it to you,
but a Sherman that works is better than a Panther or a King Tiger
broken down on the side of the road.
As for the Chinese, the one time they faced a Western army, they
achieved initial success due to strategic surprise, and then got their
happy asses beat. Quantity alone means nothing in the face of
combined arms. The other time the Chinese got froggy outside their
national borders, they got their asses beat by the Vietnamese like a
redheaded stepchild. Compare relative production figures for those
economies, or compare population figures. What you end up with is
that chunks of GNP don't kill people, effective armies kill people.
And if you have a huge economy but do not build an army capable of
power projection with it, you can't project power. GNP is not magic,
and it's not terribly interchangable. The Chinese cannot currently
project power beyond their borders with much effectiveness, and
building a power projection army (which they are in the long-term
process of doing) is not a trivial endeavor. I will be retired long
before the Chinese are capable of fighting outside China. Doesn't
mean invading China is a real bright idea without serious use of
nuclear weapons, but neither are the Chinese a real threat to other
countries that don't border them.
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again. We're looking for thousands of Persians."
Gzg-l mailing list