Chapter 2 Chapter two

One of the most obvious and advantageous acts of combat contrary to the so-called laws of war is that of attacking a huddled enemy by a scattered force.Such combat operations often have the character of a people's war.This kind of action is not a confrontation between two armies, but one side disperses the army, and a small army acts alone to attack the enemy. When it encounters a large enemy attack, it will run away immediately, and attack again when there is an opportunity.The Spanish Zouaves did it; the Caucasian mountaineers did it; the Russians did it in 1812. This kind of combat action is called guerrilla warfare, and the name itself speaks for itself.Such combat operations not only do not conform to any law, but are exactly the opposite of the well-known rules of tactics that are accepted as infallible.The law states that the assailant should concentrate his forces in order to be stronger than his opponent at the time of engagement.

Guerrilla warfare (history has shown that guerrilla warfare is often victorious) happens to completely violate this law. This contradiction is due to the belief in military science that the strength of an army corresponds to its number.Military scientists say that the larger the army, the greater the power. Lesgrosebataillonsonttoujoursraison． ① -------- ①French: Power is always with the side with the most troops. This statement in military science is the same as mechanics explaining moving objects. Mechanics research is only based on the mass of the object. Research shows that whether the strength of two moving objects is equal depends on whether the masses of each other are equal.

Force (momentum) is the product of mass and velocity. In military terms, the strength of an army is the product of its mass and an unknown quantity X. There are countless examples in history where the number of armies does not match their strength—a small army defeats a large army. Therefore, military science admits vaguely that there is an unknown factor. Look for this unknown factor in the equipment of the army, and most often—in the genius of the commander.However, all these efforts have failed to produce results consistent with historical facts. In fact, this unknown X can be found as long as one abandons the incorrect view (to please the hero) of the orders issued by the supreme authority during the war.

This X is the morale of the army, it is the high-spirited fighting spirit and the determination to go through fire and water of the people who make up this army. Or use a gun that can fire thirty rounds per minute at a rapid rate, it doesn't matter at all.Combatants with strong fighting spirit and belief in victory always have the most favorable fighting conditions. The morale factor of the army is multiplied by the number of troops to get the product of strength.It is the task of science to elucidate this unknown factor, the value of morale. Only we no longer use the command of the commander, military equipment, etc. as the conditions for showing strength, as the value of the factor, and use it arbitrarily to replace the value of the unknown X, but admit without reservation that this unknown X is not Anything else, but the determination shown by daring to go through fire and water for the battle, this task can be solved.Only by using equations to express the known historical facts and comparing the relative value of this unknown can it be possible to determine the unknown itself.

If ten men, ten battalions or ten divisions fight against fifteen men, fifteen battalions or divisions, ten will defeat fifteen, that is to say, they will wipe out or capture them all, and they will all be captured. Only four were lost; four for one side and fifteen for one side.Therefore 4=15, ie 4X=16Y.So X:Y=15:4, this equation does not tell us the value of the unknown, but it tells us the ratio of the two unknowns. In the series of data obtained in the equations of various historical units (battles, campaigns, phases of war) that can be invoked, there must be some regularity in these data, and it may be possible to reveal these regularities.

The tactical rule of concentrating superior forces when attacking and spreading out when retreating imperceptibly proves the truth that the strength of an army lies in its morale.Leading an army to attack requires a greater discipline than holding a position to repel an enemy attack, and such discipline can only be achieved in group action.Ignoring the tactical rules of army morale has repeatedly been proven to be incorrect, especially in all people's wars, the fact that the morale of the troops is high or low is contradicted by that rule. When the French retreated in 1812, the strategy should have been to disperse their defenses, but the French army huddled together, because the morale of the French army was so low that it would not collapse immediately unless they huddled together.The Russians, on the other hand, were completely on the contrary. Strategically, the army should be assembled for a large-scale attack, but in fact it was dispersed into small troops, because the morale of the army has been so high that the soldiers take the initiative to attack without any coercion. sacrifice.