1/12/2024 0 Comments Verdun ww1 definition![]() Edward Luttwak said in an excellent article in the August issue of Air Force magazine: An attrition contest is not promising for the outnumbered force, while maneuver makes quantitative factors less important by striking at the enemy’s mind. In many scenarios Marines are likely to be outnumbered in men and materiel. How does the Boyd Theory and its application to ground warfare, maneuver war, relate to the Marine Corps? It is relevant, because maneuver war is the most promising tool for the side with fewer numbers and less weight of metal. The nerve of the French high command broke under the strain. ![]() The Germans presented the French with a succession of new and unexpected situations at a pace too rapid for the French observation-decisionaction cycle. The French campaign of 1940 is an excellent example of the Boyd process in operation. The real defeat is the nervous/ mental/systemic breakdown caused when he becomes aware the situation is beyond his control, which is in turn a product of our ability consistently to cut inside the time of his observation-decision-action cycle. In maneuver war, if the enemy is destroyed physically (and often that is not necessary), that is not the decision but merely the outcome. The Boyd Theory is the theory of maneuver warfare. Often he suffers mental breakdown in the form of panic and is defeated before he is destroyed physically. Suddenly, he realizes there is nothing he can do to control the situation or turn it to his advantage. Instead of achieving convergence with the first party’s action, he finds himself facing everwidening divergence. Because of his longer cycle time, his reaction is facing a later action by the faster party than that which it was intended to oppose. As this party repeatedly cycles inside his opponent, the opponent finds he is losing control of the situation. The potentially victorious party is the one with an observationdecision-action cycle consistently quicker than his opponent’s (including the time required to transition from one cycle to another). He observed that in any conflict situation all parties go through repeated cycles of observation-decision-action. More recently he has devoted himself to studying the nature of conflict in general. This theory was developed by Col John Boyd, USAF (Ret.) and is appropriately known as the “Boyd Theory.”Ĭol Boyd was the father of energy management air combat tactics. Recently, the concepts behind maneuver war have been organized and expanded into an overall theory of conflict. ![]() Maneuver means moving and acting consistently more rapidly than the opponent. Maneuver is not a matter simply of moving or even of moving rapidly. ![]() Movement is constant, irregular in direction and timing and responsive to fleeting opportunities.Ī key to understanding maneuver war is to realize that not all movement is maneuver. Attacks ooze through and around enemy defenses. The goal is set in terms of destroying the enemy’s forces not seizing terrain seen a priori as “key.” A defender places only a “tripwire” forward and relies on counterattacks into the flanks and rear of enemy penetrations. Effort focuses more on the operational than on the tactical level. Maneuver conflict is more psychological than physical. Firepower is a servant of maneuver, used to create openings in enemy defenses and, when necessary, to annihilate the remnants of his forces after their cohesion has been shattered. The principal tool is moving forces into unexpected places at surprisingly high speeds. The objective is the enemy’s mind not his body. The goal is destruction of the enemy’s vital cohesiondisruption-not piece-by-piece physical destruction. In contrast, maneuver war is warfare on the model of Genghis Khan, the German blitzkrieg and almost all Israeli campaigns. Defenses tend to be linear (“forward defense”), attacks frontal, battles set-piece and movement preplanned and slow. Efforts focus on the tactical level with goals set in terms of terrain. ![]() The conflict is more physical than mental. It has an opposite, the firepower-attrition style.įirepower-attrition is warfare on the model of Verdun in World War I, a mutual casualty inflicting and absorbing contest where the goal is a favorable exchange rate. Maneuver warfare refers to an overall concept or “style” of warfare. After all, doesn’t all warfare involve fire and maneuver? Isn’t maneuver just another word for movement? How can there be such a thing as “ maneuver warfare“? It may be time to review just what this term means and why it’s important to the United States Marine Corps. Several recent articles in the GAZETTE have referred to “ maneuver warfare.” The term may have occasioned some confusion among Marines. Defining Maneuver Warfare for the Marine Corps ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |