How much have you actually DONE -vs- "read about"??
Stay safe; stay armed.
Artillery brings dignity to an otherwise vulgar brawl; and a good rifle helps too.
Since I don't understand the argument, that would appear to be the case.
Wars may be prosecuted as extensions of a country's political goals and ambitions, but it is fought with rifles and spirit.
No. Wars must be prosecuted as political means to an end. And while rifles help win wars, "spirit" doesn't count for much at all. If you have any doubts about that, ask the French how far they got on elan alone, or the Germans Fourth Army, for that matter.
If you read "On Strategy" by the late Col Harry Summers, you will see the difference.
I read Summers' book about 20 years ago, and I remember liking it, but disagreeing with most of its conclusions regarding Vietnam. If I remember correctly, Summers argued that defeat was largely the result of errors in strategy by Westmoreland's people. I think it goes beyond that. I don't believe any war in Indochina was winnable, in the sense that we could have permanently suppressed insurgency without enormous costs, both in economic terms and in manpower. Invading Laos and North Vietnam could have escaped the underlying political mistakes at the heart of US entry.
As the LTC Summers stated to his NVA LTC counter-part..."You know we defeated you on the battlefield every time." to which his counterpart stated, "Yes, but that is irrelevent."
Again, to quote you, "Since I don't understand the argument, that would appear to be the case."
How much have you actually DONE -vs- "read about"??
Stay safe; stay armed.
Artillery brings dignity to an otherwise vulgar brawl; and a good rifle helps too.