When did you realize that war boils down to who has better logistics and higher morale?
When did you realize that war boils down to who has better logistics and higher morale?
When did you realize that war boils down to who has better logistics and higher morale?
France had decent logistics and morale in ww2. It only boils down to logistics later in the war when the big questions about how to fight it have been settled.
This assumes that one party is significantly less competent than the other. The incompetence of French military leadership in the Franco-Prussian War and WW2 were so poor modern military schools in the US use them as perfect examples of how not to fight wars.
The Germans were incompetent also, for example rushing into operation Barbarossa without ice adapted equipment or even winter clothing. I hesitate to conclude their victory over France was a fluke victory, but the Michelin incident causing them to rethink their plans and attempt an armored spearhead was certainly an influential random event.
They had excellent logistics, for trench warfare.
Hitler postponed operation typhoon which could have hit Moscow a month before winter
everyone shits on the maginot but it was a good idea and it worked
what was the problem was the piss-poor cnc of the french military making responding to the german attacks almost impossible
they would go into moscow, get encircled and die if they were even able to reach it
the whole city was prepared for urban battle and heavily fortified
battle of moscow was anticipated and planned for, german troops stepping into the city wouldn't defeat the soviet union
They did not. They barely invested in military after ww1, and basically prepared for another trench warfare.
Physical endurance is a major factor as well. The Roman legions weren't supermen compared to the barbarians they fought or anything, they were just better at fighting a pace that didn't exhaust them too early so that when night fell, they would still hold the field. And you can definitely win some battles just by absolutely slaughtering your enemy in some cases too, but this usually requires you to get some advantage in technology or terrain, or just waylaying your foe.
When I got interested in ancient warfare and understood why the Romans steamrolled everyone else for centuries.
>lost all wars against Aryans
>spent centuries copying Aryans to get an even footing
>got brutally subjugated by Germanic tribes
>"MUH ROMAS WUZ STEAMROLLING"
romaboos are mentally ill
>starts frothing at the mouth at the mere mention of Rome
Cry more, barbare.
>romans were undefeatable
>they weren't
>SEEEEEEETHING
got em
Almost everyone else
Learning about the second Punic war and how Hannibal BTFO the Romans multiple times and still lost.
it all boils down to buearacracy. Low morale is just the symptom
ww2 poster thread?
war boils down to if you got shot or not
How old was I or how old was the world? World has known it for centuries; I've known it since I was probably 10. (world at war, on reruns)
Why would join the navy specifically if she was a man?
she's thinking of all the gay sex from the perspective of a woman in the navy
As soon as I started reading primary sources written by famous generals. So much of it is just preparation, planning, and administration. Caesar was constantly preoccupied with securing food, and more often than not the real difficulty he encountered in Gaul was keeping his men fed and also keeping them from mutinying. He could be in the middle of a siege and his thoughts would be more on when the next food shipment would get to his army than when the besieged settlement would give in.
From Day 1.
War comes down to
>better logistics
>better economy
>better war industry
Morale isn't a winning factor in modern war. An insurgent fighter could have the highest morale in the world yet that wouldn't save him from a drone strike
Well look at Afghanistan. The U.S. could carry out drone strikes all day long and occupy the country as long as it was willing to pay for it, and the Taliban could not win, but the moment the U.S. left, the Taliban took over. So why did this happen?
I think one reason is because this whole mission was propping up an artificial government that was hand-picked / selected by the U.S. to be their clients. And to prop them up, that meant importing a section of "America" like a Command & Conquer game with your base buildings that pop up on the map, but Afghanistan might as well be an alien planet with much of the country still practically residing in the Middle Ages. It doesn't have the conditions to become a "liberal democracy," so while the Taliban might not be "good" from an American point of view, politically they make more "sense" via organizing things at the local level through clan councils and dispensing a "harsh but fair" justice system.