Posted: 1/2/2010 11:52:47 AM EDT
|
"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man." –– Gen. George S. Patton
"Regardless of the size or quality of defensive forces, the defender usually extracts large costs from the attacker in time, resources, and casualties." - Military Operations on Urbanized Terrain (MOUT) MCWP 3-35.3 "Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more." –– Gen. George S. Patton Anyone have more along this line? |
|
No fort ever withstood a good siege. raf
As an aside, your last Patton quote is taken out of context. Patton was always seeking to maneuver, so as to avoid costly frontal assaults. While, at times forced into direct assault/infantry style warfare by lack of supplies/stupidity of superiors, Patton abhorred the casualties that WW I-style tactics brought. |
|
SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR
When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities. The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain, while the town still remains untaken. Such are the disastrous effects of a siege.There are roads which must not be followed, armies which must be not attacked, towns which must be besieged, positions which must not be contested, commands of the sovereign which must not be obeyed. |
|
Quoted:
There are some excellent texts on siege warfare. I can't think of one offhand as the library is at the house. Static positions with time to prepare are a force multiplier. Even so it won't help against overwhelming odds. Or sufficient time. Sieges starve you out. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are some excellent texts on siege warfare. I can't think of one offhand as the library is at the house. Static positions with time to prepare are a force multiplier. Even so it won't help against overwhelming odds. Or sufficient time. Sieges starve you out. helos and air support has really changed that ... think berlin air drops . Fire bases ,ect |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are some excellent texts on siege warfare. I can't think of one offhand as the library is at the house. Static positions with time to prepare are a force multiplier. Even so it won't help against overwhelming odds. Or sufficient time. Sieges starve you out. helos and air support has really changed that ... think berlin air drops . Fire bases ,ect That depends on the quantity of air support, and the AA resistance to it. Consider Dien Bien Phu and Stalingrad as examples of failed air support, and Khe Sanh as an example where air support came through. |
|
Quoted:
Rorke's Drift is the exception, the Alamo is the rule. Ops The Alamo was not lost b/c it was a static position, it was lost b/c it was outnumbered 20:1 or more. IMHO, a static defensive position, if properly prepared, can be excellent for defense. It all depends on what your enemy has to bring to get you out. And you must be prepared to leave, if you think that you can be forced out or overrun. |
|
Static positions absolutely have their use, even in counterinsurgency. In a type of warfare without fronts, where would Patton's tanks repair, rearm, and refit without static positions of some sort? They wouldn't, and they would quickly cease to be a maneuver asset to him. The days of the Maginot Line are gone forever, absolutely true. But being able to defend a fixed site still plays a major role in modern combat.
Modern warfare is SOOOO logistically intensive that it simply cannot continue without fixed support positions of some kind. Even our lightest infantry don't truly count as light infantry- they cannot self sustain for long and they certainly cannot engage a wide variety of battlefield threats. But you cannot hold fixed positions against "anything" and if you believe a position is unbreakable you are always wrong. Always. You can simply make it costly for an attacker, but you can never make it impossible if he's willing to pay the price. So |
|
Most of these quotes are from military men thinking in military terms. Due to the differences between a military and their role, and the role a civilian survivalist has, I'm not sure you can really infer that "Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man." I mean, Patton had trucks bringing up C rations and 155mm's to pound enemy positions. Raiders won't have artillery and unless you're in an area where hunting/gathering is going to work, you're in a fixed position anyway since that garden isn't going to fit in a rucksack.
|
|
Most of the ancient Roman towns in Croatia survived.... surrounded by hills,arty and enemies with tanks etc. they didn't fall because the attackers didn't want to commit to house to house fighting where the defenders were dug in well with just infantry arms.
Sieges are also hard to keep intact depending on the season and geography. Imagine how many men you need to surround a single home in some SWAT sieges? 30? Now imagine how many men really are needed for a 24/7 surveillance of a town. Even in Iraq we had AQ types slipping through as the Marines closed in. The chaos and fog of war is real. So is bribery to get through lines with contraband, blackmarket goods, etc. Had the Branch Davidians had a hedgerow or had they thought of anti-armor landscaping, their siege might have ended with a surrender rather than an annihilation. Now I'll grant that MOST stick built homes are not good places to be holed up into. Concealment not cover. So most subdivisions made of stick homes are death traps. |
|
There are different types of combat and each has its own tactics/benefits/liabilities. Static positions do have a place in modern war and so does fire/maneuver warfare.
The Atlantic wall fell but exacted a heavy toll on the attackers. Stalingrad held, Midway Island held. Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal etc. fell. Hopefully Cheyenne mountain will hold. Bastogne held. etc. |
|
We've gone from static defense quotes to arguing static positions in general.
In a nation-supported conflict, fixed positions have moderate usage. You still need a central location to conduct the battle and warfare. When air support is used, that airbase becomes a static position. Afghanistan has also shown that geography can be a static position. The mountains are the insurgents static position. In the case of civil unrest, a house can be a great static position...provided you know its limitations. Someone brought up the branch davidians and the primary limitation was shown, fire. Unless you build your home of type I or type II construction, you are susceptible to having some one set your house on fire. If you built a home's exterior and roof of non-combustible construction, removed landscaping vegetation which would allow someone to approach concealed and eliminating blind spots, you could successfully defend a home near indefinetely provided your provisions held out. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rorke's Drift is the exception, the Alamo is the rule. Ops The Alamo was not lost b/c it was a static position, it was lost b/c it was outnumbered 20:1 or more. IMHO, a static defensive position, if properly prepared, can be excellent for defense. It all depends on what your enemy has to bring to get you out. And you must be prepared to leave, if you think that you can be forced out or overrun. With enough bodies you can take any position, you just have to be wiling to accept the horrendous casualties. The point of fortifications are to increase the number of casualties the enemy is going to take assaulting the position, and possibly deter a direct attack. Forcing the enemy to bypass or lay siege or go harass someone else |
Look up the term Pyrrhic victory.  If an attacking force loses too much in taking a fixed position, the cost/benefit analysis will show them that it might be a mistake trying to take it. Of course, history shows that governments sometimes miscalculate the cost/benefit analysis.
|
|
Quotes about static positions:
"If you are found here at night, you'll be found here in the morning" "Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again" "Trespassers will be violated" "Trespassers will be used for science experiments" "Is there life after death? trespass here and find out." But this one, kinda says it all..... http://www.metalfacades.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/blognosolicitors.jpg If you have family inside, small kids, or elderly who cannot bug out, no matter how you feel about a static position, you may still be forced to defend it. Be prepared to do so. |