Chapter 6 Chapter 5: New moves in the game of war

The masters of the art of warfare in the 21st century will be those who recombine capabilities in innovative ways to achieve tactical, operational, and strategic objectives. —El Tilford Everything is changing.The explosion of technology, the renewal of weapons, the expansion of security concepts, the adjustment of strategic goals, the blurring of battlefield boundaries, and the expansion of the scope and scale of non-military means and non-military personnel involved in war... When all these changes are focused on one point , we believe that the era of the revolution in the law of warfare has arrived.This revolution is not to seek a matching method of warfare for each change, but to find a common method of warfare for all changes.In other words, for the ever-changing chess game of future wars, find a new way to respond to all situations [1].

[1] War is the most typical game, but it is often not restricted by classical game theory.Because war is essentially an irrational behavior of people, various speculations based on "rational people" are naturally easy to fail.The terrible consequences of nuclear weapons have made human beings gradually regain their long-lost rationality from the most irrational behaviors.The process of globalization has prompted human beings to think in the way of "rational people" when seeking national security, learn to get rid of the "prisoner's dilemma", and no longer fall into the "cockfight" of the United States and the Soviet Union for hegemony.The economic game of both cooperation and competition has begun to seep into the military field and affect warfare in the new era. (See Zhang Weiying's Introduction to "Game Theory and Information Economics", Shanghai Joint Publishing House, Shanghai People's Publishing House, 1996)

Shake off the cloud of battle Who has seen tomorrow's war?no one.But its scenes have long been frozen on the screen of our brains like vulgar cartoons through the mouths of wizard-style prophets, big and small.From the strangulation of satellites in orbit to the competition of nuclear submarines in the depths of the ocean; from the precision bombs dropped by stealth bombers to the cruise missiles launched by Aegis cruisers, the sky and the earth have comprehensive coverage, and so on.The most representative of these is the description of an actual military exercise conducted by the digitalized troops of the US military at the Fort Irwin National Training Center:

In the command center of the digitized force acting as the "Blue Army", computers are constantly inputting and processing information from satellites and "Joint Star" aircraft; the early warning aircraft monitors the entire airspace; Accurate missiles attack the target; armored corps and armed helicopters take turns to launch a three-dimensional attack on the enemy; infantrymen receive instructions through laptop computers and shoot with automatic weapons with helmet sights; and the most exciting scene is actually a soldier combo With five clicks of the mouse, the powerful firepower of our own artillery and aviation was directed to the enemy tank group on the other side of the ridge. After 30 seconds, his computer screen displayed: The enemy tank has been hit.

Despite this exercise in the Mojave Desert, the "Blue Army", known as the "21st Century Army" and fully digitally equipped, finally lost to the "Red Army" with traditional equipment with 1 win, 1 draw and 6 losses.But this does not prevent Secretary of Defense Cohen from announcing at the press conference after the exercise: I think that here, you are witnessing a military revolution[2]... [2] Beginning March 15, 1997, the U.S. Army conducted a 14-day Digital Brigade Task Force Advanced Combat Exercise at the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, California.According to Army Chief of Staff Gen. Reimer, the purpose of this experiment is to determine whether 21st century force technology can answer three decisive questions in an instant in combat: Where am I?Where is the companion?Where is the enemy?Judging from the experimental situation, the troops that have been adapted and armed with new digital technologies are faster, more lethal, and more survivable than the current army.Regarding this exercise, the American "Defense News" from March 17-23, 1997 had a detailed report.

Obviously, the military revolution Cohen refers to is exactly the same as the war understood by the prophets we mentioned above. Winners always like to coast on the winning track.Just like the French army, which won the first World War by relying on the Verdun trenches, hoped that the next war would be fought on the Maginot Line, the US military, which won the Gulf War, also hoped to continue to experience the "Desert Storm" type of crisis in the 21st century. addiction.Although every American general who intends to gain glory like Schwarzkopf understands that the war of the next century will never be a simple repeat of the Gulf War.For this reason, before the smoke cleared, they began to update the weapons and equipment of the US military, and made adjustments to the original combat theory and organization system.From the "2010 Joint Force Concept" to "The Army of the Day After Tomorrow", soldiers all over the world have seen the framework of the future US military and the concept of American-style warfare.It can be regarded as a majestic palace with extraordinary weather.Little do they know that the blind spot of American vision happens to be here.

So far, what we have seen so far is the development trend of the U.S. military’s weapons and equipment, changes in national defense policies, evolution of combat theories, updates to regulations, and speeches by senior generals, all moving in one direction.That is, it is determined that military means are the last resort to resolve future conflicts, and all disputes between countries will eventually be attributed to the confrontation of two armies on the battlefield.Under this premise, the U.S. military has set itself the requirement of winning two theater wars almost at the same time, and has made full preparations for this [3].The problem is that in the Pentagon, who else can realize as clearly as General Powell, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: the United States is concentrating most of its energy on re-fighting "the Cold War-style war that will never come again", and it is very likely to put I used my strength in the wrong direction [4]?Because the international trend at the end of the 20th century is clearly showing that, as a reality, the era when all wars involve weapons has not yet been translated into history, but as a concept, it has begun to be obviously outdated.With the increase of various international conventions to curb the arms race and weapons proliferation, the intervention of the United Nations and regional international organizations in local wars and regional conflicts has increased, and the military threat to national security has been relatively reduced; on the contrary, a large number of high-tech The emergence of these threats has greatly increased the possibility of using non-military means to threaten the security of other countries. The international community is helpless in the face of such non-military threats that are no less damaging than a war, at least lacking necessary and effective restrictions.This objectively accelerated the formation of non-military warfare, and at the same time brought the old national security concept and system to the brink of collapse.In addition to the intensified terrorist wars, the hacker wars, financial wars, and computer virus wars that are catching up from behind, together with various "new concept wars" that are still difficult to name, are enough to make the "defend the enemy outside the country" style The concept of security became a thing of the past overnight.

[3] In 1997, the U.S. National Military Strategy once again emphasized that the mission and level of military capability of the U.S. military is to win two large-scale theater wars at the same time.In fact, this is still a continuation of the military strategy and army building policy of the "Cold War" era.James R. Blacker, in his article "Building a Military Revolutionary Military Force -- A Military Reform Approach Different from the Quadrennial Defense Review Report," states that this approach was "ended 10 years ago The times chose a military solution devised 20 years ago". (Summer 1997 issue of the American "Strategic Review" magazine)

[4] See the research report "Strategy and Military Revolution: From Theory to Policy" of the Institute of Strategic Studies, US Army War College, Part VIII. The U.S. military community has not failed to notice the ebb and flow of military threats and non-military threats (we have pointed out this point in the "National Defense Report" of the U.S. Department of Defense for several fiscal years mentioned above), but they Pushing the solution to the latter issue to politicians and the Central Intelligence Agency, I retreated from the existing new perspectives such as full-dimensional combat and non-combat military operations, and shrunk more and more tightly into a plant full of various The tree of watchmen, the fruit of cutting-edge weapons, is just waiting for any stupid rabbit to hit it.And when Saddam knocked unconscious under this tree, who would be the second such rabbit?

The American soldiers who lost their opponents due to the disintegration of the former Soviet Union are trying their best to find reasons not to let themselves be "unemployed" in a state of "drawing their swords and looking around at a loss".Because from generals to soldiers, from offensive spears to defensive shields, from grand strategy to small tactics, everything in the U.S. military is prepared for victory in a major war.Once there is no longer any confrontation between the two armies, not to mention the US military, even the US Congress will have a sense of loss of purpose.The result is that if there is no enemy, an enemy must be created.Therefore, even in a small place like Kosovo, they would not let go of the opportunity to try the Frost Blade.The U.S. military, which has been digging deeper and deeper into the horns of either using force or doing nothing, seems to be unwilling to extend its tentacles from the field of war to the field of non-war military operations. It is a vast and emerging field of non-military warfare.This may be due to lack of sensitivity to new things, professional habits, or more likely due to limited thinking.Regardless of the reason, it is an indisputable fact that American soldiers have always locked their vision within the scope of the cloud of war.

Although the United States bears the brunt of this non-military war threat and has repeatedly become a victim, it is surprising that such a large country does not have a unified strategy and command organization to deal with the new threat. What is even more ironic is that there are 49 departments Both are responsible for countering terrorist activities, but they rarely coordinate and cooperate with each other.Other countries are not much better than the United States in this regard.Funding for security needs in various countries is still limited to the military and intelligence agencies, while investment in other directions is pitifully small.Still taking the United States as an example, it spends 7 billion on anti-terrorism every year, which is only one thirty-fifth of its military expenditure of 250 billion US dollars. No matter how countries turn a deaf ear to the imminent threat of non-military war, this objective fact is expanding and spreading according to its own law and speed, approaching the survival of mankind step by step.People don't need to point out that when human beings focus more on calling for peace and curbing wars, many things that were originally part of our peaceful life have begun to become weapons that harm peace.Even those principles that we have always regarded as the golden rule have begun to show a tendency to be rebellious, and have become a means for some countries to launch attacks on other countries, or certain organizations and individuals against the entire society.Just as there are computers, there are computer viruses, and there are currencies, there are financial speculations, freedom of belief and religious extremism and cults, universal human rights and national sovereignty, free economy and trade protection, national autonomy and global integration, national enterprises and multinational corporations. , information openness and information boundaries, knowledge sharing and technology monopoly, each field may break out a war of different groups of people killing each other at some point tomorrow.The battlefield is all around you, and the enemy is online.It's just that there is neither gunpowder smoke nor bloody smell.But it's still war because it fits the definition of modern warfare: forcing the enemy to serve one's own interests.Obviously, no country's soldiers are mentally prepared for this kind of new war that is completely beyond the military space, but this is a harsh reality that all soldiers must face head-on. New threats require a new view of national security, and new security rules require soldiers to expand their horizons before they can expand their victories, that is: brush away the long and narrow line of shadow that the battle cloud casts over your eyes. The Breaking of Rules and the Territory of Invalidation As an extreme way to resolve conflicts of survival and interests, war has always been a beast that has never been truly domesticated by humans.On the one hand, it is the scavenger of the social ecological chain, and on the other hand, it poses a direct threat to human survival.How to drive it without being hurt by it?For thousands of years, especially since the 20th century, human beings have always focused on one thing during the intervals of frequent wars: trying to put ferocious beasts in cages.To this end, people have formulated countless treaties and rules.From the famous Geneva Convention to the various war-related resolutions that the United Nations is still making to this day, one barrier after another has been erected on the road of crazy and bloody wars, trying to use international laws to control the damage caused by wars to human beings. At a minimum, it ranges from the specific prohibition of using biological and chemical weapons, the prohibition of indiscriminate killing of civilians, the prohibition of ill-treatment of captives, the restriction of the use of landmines, etc., to the broad opposition to the use of force or the threat of force in dealing with state relations.All these rules.It has become increasingly accepted by all countries.Among them, the most commendable is that a series of treaties such as nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear test ban, and bilateral or multilateral reduction of nuclear weapons have prevented mankind from entering a nuclear winter.At the end of the Cold War, the whole world celebrated with hands, thinking that a "terrible peace" had been walked out of it.After Schwarzkopf knocked Saddam down on the Gulf boxing ring with a "storm" punch, President Bush was even more ambitious: "The new world order has withstood the first test." He is like Chamberlain who returned from Munich. In that way, it was declared that mankind would "come together in a world with the hope of peace".How is the result?Like Chamberlain, he also spoke big words early[5]. [5] In fact, it is the Iraq issue, which Bush has not completely resolved.Saddam has increasingly become a heart disease that is hard to get rid of for the Americans. Neither the Cold War nor the end of the Gulf War has brought to the world the new international order that politicians wished for and that all mankind expected.The collapse of the bipolar world caused the beasts of local wars to roar out of their cages one after another, soaking Rwanda, Somalia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chechnya, Congo, Kosovo and other countries and regions one after another in a pool of blood.Only then did people discover once again how vulnerable the peace efforts of thousands of years or hundreds of years are! The emergence of this situation is related to each country's pragmatic attitude towards the establishment of international rules.Whether a country recognizes a rule or not depends only on whether it is beneficial to itself.Small countries hope to protect their own interests through rules, while big countries intend to use rules to control other countries.When the rules are inconsistent with their own interests, no matter whether they are big or small, they will not hesitate to use fouls to achieve their goals. Generally speaking, small countries can still be corrected by big countries in the name of law enforcement. The country enforces the law and arrests the head of the country to stand trial in its own country; another example is India's disregard for the nuclear test ban treaty, and even annexation of the Himalayan country Sikkim, which is the same as Iraq's annexation of Kuwait, but the international community has been helpless time and time again.[ 6].But everything has its nemesis and natural enemy, just like a Chinese proverb goes: When you order tofu in brine, one thing falls one thing.The international community is powerless in the face of those big powers that not only participate in the formulation and use of rules, but also ignore or even destroy the rules when the rules are not good for them, and certain non-state forces that do not recognize any rules and specifically target all existing national orders. The rise is in stark contrast.As the natural enemies of the international community, especially some big countries, they have a subtle impact on the social ecological balance while threatening the survival of human beings.In other words, as a kind of social destructive force, these non-state forces not only undermine the normal international order, but also contain certain major powers from destroying the international community.For example, unknown hackers [7] made warning intrusions into the website of the Ministry of National Defense after India conducted a nuclear test, and Muslim billionaire Osama bin Laden was dissatisfied with the presence of the United States in the Middle East.Although it is difficult to define whether the role of these actions is positive or negative, what is certain is that all these actions have the destructive characteristics of disregard for rules and irresponsibility. [6] The "Desert Fox" operation recently adopted by the United States and the United Kingdom is also a major country's serious foul that clearly violates the UN Charter. [7] Hacker is a transliteration of the English "HACKER", which is originally intended to be neutral and not derogatory.Early hackers, with their obsession with technology and kindness to society, formed a unique code of hacker ethics, which has been abided by by many generations of hackers.But in today's cyberspace, the world is also declining, and there is no longer a gentleman's style. The direct result of the violation of the rules is that the territories demarcated by tangible or invisible borders recognized by the international community lose their effectiveness.Because all non-state forces that declare war on the international community through non-military war actions appear in a way that transcends the country, transcends the domain, and transcends means.The tangible national borders, the invisible cyberspace, international laws, national laws, codes of conduct, and moral ethics all do not constitute binding force on them.They are not responsible to anyone, they are not bound by any rules, they are omnipresent in the choice of goals, and they are omnipotent in the use of means.They are highly concealed because of their surreptitious actions, they cause extensive damage because of their extreme behavior, and they are extremely cruel because they attack civilians indiscriminately.All these, through the real-time, continuous, and covering propaganda of modern media, greatly strengthened the terrorist effect.There will be no declaration of war, no fixed battlefield, and no frontal combat against these people. In most cases, there will be no gunpowder, gunfire, and bloodshed. However, the damage and pain suffered by the international community are no less than a military war. war. As those old terrorists who specialized in kidnapping, assassination and hijacking gradually faded out of the stage of the times, new terrorist forces rose rapidly and quickly filled the vacuum left by their predecessors.In just over ten years, computer hackers are the first to become world public nuisances from an unknown person.The popularization of personal computers, especially the formation of the Internet, makes the malicious behavior of hackers endanger the current social order day by day.The hackers we are talking about here refer to those network killers who steal information, delete and modify files, release viruses, transfer funds, and destroy programs on the Internet.In order to distinguish them from those non-malicious hackers, it may be more accurate to name the former as "Internet gangsters" and "Internet bullies".Their destructive power to today's world is astonishing. As early as 1988, when people knew nothing about the dangers of hacking activities, the little "worm" designed by Robert Morris made the All 6,000 computers in military and civilian computer systems across the United States, including the "Vision Planning Agency" of the US Department of Defense, the RAND Corporation Research Center and Harvard University, were paralyzed.Since then, such incidents have begun to emerge in an endless stream in countries and regions where the Internet is accessible.Since the U.S. government began to crack down on cybercrime in 1990, hacking activities have not only not decreased, but have spread to the whole world.It is worth noting that after the U.S. military's "Information Warfare" doctrine lists enemy military or political opponents and unapproved users, insiders, terrorists, non-state organizations, and foreign intelligence agencies as six sources of online threats, there are Hackers with national or military backgrounds have begun to appear [8], which not only greatly strengthened the lineup of hackers, but also quickly escalated the actions of stragglers (net gangsters) into national (net bully) behavior, and made all countries (including those with countries or military hackers) face increasing cyber threats that are increasingly difficult to foresee and prevent.The only thing that can be foreseen is that this threat is definitely more harmful to the United States than other countries.Regarding this prospect, even J. Settle, who is in charge of the computer crime investigation of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, said half confidently and half worriedly: "Give me 10 selected hackers, and within 90 days I can make this country surrender. . " (Another concise and vivid way of saying is "turn off the United States" - school sweepers know) [8] In 1996, the US Department of Defense Information Systems Agency was established to strengthen the protection of military information systems.In the same year, the Presidential Commission on the Protection of Critical Infrastructure in the United States was also announced.The commission is responsible for protecting telecommunications, finance, electricity, water, pipelines and transportation systems.All of this is to deal with threats from reality. The U.S. military’s FM100-6 field doctrine "Information Operations" states that "the threats to information infrastructure are real, they originate from a global scale, and they are technically multifaceted, and These threats are growing. These threats come from individuals and groups driven by military, political, social, cultural, ethnic, religious or personal, industrial interests. These threats also come from information lunatics." (Chinese translation, P7) Compared with cyber terrorists such as "cybers" - hackers, bin Laden's bomb terror is closer to traditional terrorism in terms of mantle.But this does not prevent us from counting him among the new terrorism.Because from Bin Laden, apart from the religious or even cult background and the tendency to oppose the control of major powers.You can also see the shadows of those old fighters who are bluffing, keen on the limelight, using light weapons and single-handed. In other respects, they are really different.Before the big explosions that shocked the world in the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, bin Laden's name was not even on the list of 30 terrorist organizations released by the International Anti-Terrorist Organization, although He has been involved in many murders, but he is only an "unsung hero" in the Muslim world because he has always kept quiet.Even after the Americans fired cruise missiles and issued an arrest warrant against him, he has repeatedly denied any involvement in the bombing. "Stealth and concealment", emphasizing practical effects rather than false names, may be the first major feature of bin Laden's new terrorist organization.In addition, because they have learned to use economic means and take advantage of the free economy advocated by the West, they have gained stability through the establishment of operating companies and even banks, large-scale drug trafficking and smuggling, reselling arms, printing huge amounts of counterfeit banknotes, and donations from religious members. sources of funding [9].On this basis, the tentacles of these new terrorist organizations have extended to a wider area, and their methods have become more diverse, such as making extensive use of religious or cult organizations, developing their own propaganda media, forming anti-government militia organizations, and so on.The ease of funding ensures that they can obtain and master a large number of high-tech means, making it easy for them to kill more people.Although most of their attacks so far have targeted rich countries and Western countries, especially big countries capable of controlling other countries, their destruction of the existing order and accepted rules is a common threat to the international community.Judging from the known situation, these new terrorist organizations that are taking shape are just a few black tides of a new round of worldwide terrorist activities.To be sure, there are still more turbid currents that are unknown to us, still surging below the surface of the water. [9] The most ironic thing is that the construction company of the bin Laden family was once the builder of the US military barracks in Saudi Arabia. New to this countercurrent are international financial speculators.Although no one has listed these well-dressed and handsome guys as terrorists yet, what they did in Britain, Mexico and Southeast Asia successively, and the disastrous consequences they caused, made all "netizens" "It's hard to hold a candle to bin Laden's generation.The financial giants represented by Soros, relying on the international hot money with a daily trading volume of more than 1.2 trillion US dollars, using financial derivatives and free economic rules, turned the world financial market upside down and caused waves of waves. The financial turmoil has gradually expanded the area of ​​the victimized country, from Southeast Asia to Russia to Japan, and finally Europe and the United States, which are watching from the other side, have not been spared. The current global financial system and economic order have been fundamentally shaken, and it has become a threat. Another new threat to human society and international security[10].Its typical characteristics of terrorism such as transnationality, concealment, irregularity, and huge destructiveness give us reasons to call it financial terrorism. [10] The most disturbing aspect of financial terrorism is that "hot money" can cause a devastating blow to a country's economy within a few days, affecting objects ranging from the country's central bank to ordinary people. In the face of the huge state apparatus, terrorists and their organizations may be insignificant in number and methods, but the fact is that no country dares to underestimate them.The reason is that this is a group of lunatics who do not play by any rules.A terrorist organization with nuclear weapons is definitely much more dangerous than a country that also has nuclear weapons.Bin Laden's creed is "I will not let others live if I die", so he has no scruples about letting a dozen Americans die while soaking thousands of innocent people in a pool of blood at the same time.Soros' logic is "I robbed you because your door was unlocked", so that he does not need to be responsible for destroying other countries' economies and disrupting their political order. For bin Laden hiding under the mountains of Islamic fundamentalism, Soros hiding in the jungle of free economics, and computer hackers lurking in the green veil of the Internet, no national borders exist and no borders are valid. What they have to do That is, wanton destruction in the field of rules, and withdrawal and rampage in the field of irregularities.These new types of terrorist forces have posed unprecedented severe challenges to the existing world order, which in turn has made us doubt the rationality of the established order to a certain extent.Perhaps both subduing rule breakers and changing the rules are necessary.Because any violation of the rules will bring new issues that we need to deal with seriously.In an era when the old order is about to disintegrate, the first movers are often the first to break the rules or the first to adapt to the trend.Clearly, the new terrorists are ahead of the international community in this regard. To deal with enemies who ignore the rules, the best tactic must be to break the rules.In recent times, the Americans have used cruise missiles, the Hong Kong government has used its foreign exchange reserves and administrative means, and the British government has broken the rules by allowing its secret service to "legally" kill suspected terrorists The foreign heads of state have shown signs of revising the rules and changing the tactics in due course.But it also exposed the weakness of monotonous thinking and single means.It is said that the Americans have decided to use hacking methods to find and seal bin Laden's bank accounts in various countries, fundamentally cutting off his source of funds.This is undoubtedly a breakthrough in tactics beyond the military field.But we still have to say that in this regard, the new and old terrorists who have always believed in the principle of using everything to the extreme are still the best teachers of governments. Cocktail in a master glass King Wu of Zhou 3,000 years ago and Alexander 2,000 years ago certainly didn't know what a cocktail was, but they were all masters at mixing "cocktails" on the battlefield.Because they are all good at skillfully combining more than two battlefield factors together like making cocktails, put into battle and win the victory. 1+1, this is the most elementary and oldest combination.A spear and a round shield can enable a soldier to have both offense and defense, and have a basis for advancing and retreating; two people form a team, "a long soldier is used for defense, and a short soldier is used for defense". A pair of soldiers cooperate with each other to form the smallest tactical unit[11]; Knight Don Quixote plus attendant Sancho means that the division of labor between the hussars and the baggage soldiers has been formed, so the expedition can be started after cutting off the evil formation for the fantasy princess.Such a simple combination actually contains the mystery of infinite changes on the battlefield.From cold weapons to hot weapons, to nuclear weapons, to today's so-called high-tech weapon combinations, this magic weapon in the hands of the God of Victory has always accompanied the entire war history, secretly influencing the outcome of every war.King Wu defeated Zhou with 300 military chariots, 3,000 tigers and 45,000 armored soldiers, much fewer than the hundreds of thousands of infantry of King Shang Zhou.However, this small army of mixed chariots and infantry has greatly enhanced its combat effectiveness due to its proper combination. Evidence of combined warfare.This is true in the East, and the West is no exception.In the Battle of Abela, the reason why Alexander was able to defeat Darius in one battle was that he responded to the battle and made changes to the phalanx that had always been pushed flat, which caught his opponent by surprise.His method is very simple, but the position of the cavalry is moved slightly to the rear along the two wings of the phalanx, forming a "hollow large phalanx", so that the flexibility of the cavalry and the stability of the infantry can be obtained in a strange formation. The best combination to give full play to their strengths.The result, of course, was that Alexander, who was at a disadvantage in terms of military strength, finally drank the wine of victory[12]. [11] "History of War in the Past Dynasties of China", Military Translation Publishing House, Volume 1, P78, Festival of Battle of Muye. [12] "Military History of the Western World", written by Fuller, translated by Niu Xianzhong, Volume I. Searching through the history of Eastern and Western warfare, we can't find the word "combination" in all the descriptions of tactics.But the masters of war of all ages seem to know this instinctively.King Gustav of Sweden was the most respected military reformer in the early days of the Firearms Age. All his reforms to combat formations and weapon configurations were based on combination methods.He was the first to realize the backwardness of the pikemen, and mixed them with the musketeers so that the former could provide cover for the latter between shots, in order to maximize the strengths of both; , dragoons, and musketeers were formed in a mixed formation, and under the heavy smoke of artillery bombardment, they took turns charging at the enemy's skirmish line; The functions and functions of the basic artillery are even more clear.He mixed the light artillery as a "regimental artillery" with the infantry, and let the heavy artillery form an army alone. The light and heavy artillery that seemed to be deployed separately formed a perfect combination in the entire battlefield. The role played to the extreme in his time [13]. [13] "The Evolution of Weapons and Warfare", by T.N. Dupuy, P169-176. However, all this happened before the gunnery expert Napoleon appeared.Compared with the short Corsican who pushed more than 20,000 cannons onto the battlefield, the 200 cannons in Gustave's hands can only be regarded as nothing.From 1793 to 1814, during the entire twenty years, no one knew artillery more thoroughly than Napoleon, and no one knew his subordinates more shrewdly than this commander. The lethality of the French army combined with the mobility of the cavalry, the loyalty of Marshal Davous and the ferocity of Marshal Murat, formed an attack power that made all his enemies invincible, turning the French army into an unbeatable force in the whole of Europe. The war machine that competed with it, with this machine, from Austerlitz to Borodino, achieved the myth that Napoleon was almost invincible in a hundred battles[14]. [14], Tallie. The Life of Napoleon I, by John Holland Ross. In the "Desert Storm" operation, General Schwarzkopf, who created a miracle of only a hundred people in a battle, is not a master, but his luck is almost as good as all military art masters.In fact, what is really important is not luck, but the commander who leads a modern army, like his predecessors, even pays more attention to the combination of war elements.Because in the 1990s, he held a lot more cards than his predecessors.For him, the key to winning the war to expel the Iraqi army from Kuwait, restore the oil lifeline of the West, and revive American influence in the Middle East lies in how to skillfully combine the use of alliances, media manipulation, and economic blockade with the The command of the coalition forces of land, sea, air, space, and electricity composed of armies from more than 30 countries was pinched together, and their combined forces became an iron fist against Saddam.He did it in a way his opponents were astonishingly unaware of.Hundreds of thousands of troops, thousands of tanks, and hundreds of planes, like unmixed cement, sand, and steel bars, are scattered on the front line hundreds of kilometers deep, and they simply cannot withstand the cracks that are as hard as reinforced concrete members after being fully assembled. The thrashing of old American punches.Not to mention the fact that they first detained and then released the Western hostages, made repeated mistakes, and were incapable of dealing with political isolation and economic blockade. So far, whether it was a war as far back as 3,000 years ago or as close as the end of this century, almost all victories have shown a common sign: whoever has the best combination wins. Today, with the increasing number and continuous improvement of the means that can be used for war, while the extension of war is rapidly expanding, its connotation is also beginning to deepen.More factors that have never appeared in previous wars have entered the world of war through various combinations.The addition of each new element may cause changes in the battlefield situation and the style of warfare, until the outbreak of a military revolution.Looking back at the history of war, whether it is stirrups, rifles, breech-loading guns, smokeless gunpowder, field telephones, wireless telegraphy, submarines, tanks, aircraft, missiles, atomic bombs, computers, non-lethal weapons, or the divisional system, staff system, The emergence of "wolf pack tactics"[15], blitzkrieg, carpet bombing, electronic countermeasures, and air-ground warfare, all of these elements showed hybrid advantages in combination with earlier battlefield elements, enriching to varying degrees the world at war. [15] During World War II, Dönitz, the commander of the German Navy's submarine force, invented the attack tactics of submarines on merchant ships.The main method is that after a submarine discovers the merchant fleet, it will immediately notify other submarines, and after multiple submarines arrive, it will attack the prey like a pack of wolves. 而近二十年来，信息技术、电脑病毒、互联网络、金融衍生工具等原本并非军事手段的技术，更为明天的战争展示出难以预料结局的前景。但迄今为止，对大多数军人或是将领们来说，通过元素组合方式进行作战，常常是一种非自觉行动，因此他们的组合一般都停留在兵器、阵法、战场的层面上，所绘出的战争图景也大都只限于军事领域并陶醉其中。只有那些流星划空般的军事天才，才能独步一时地打破常规，突破局限，自觉地将当时可资采用的全部手段组合在一起，弹奏出改变战争音律的千古绝响。 如果说在以往战争中，组合还只是少数天才致胜的秘诀，那么现在，自觉地把组合作为一种战法的趋势已日见明朗，并正将战争引向更为宏阔深远的领域；而技术综合时代所提供的一切，更给组合留出了近乎无限的可能性空间。可以肯定，谁能给未来战争的宴席调制出一份口味独特的鸡尾酒，谁就最终能把胜利的桂冠戴在自己头上。 用加法赢得牌局 现在，所有的牌都亮完了。我们已经知道，战争将不再是原来的样子。在很大程度上，战争甚至不再是战争，而是互联网上的交手、大众传媒的争锋、外汇期货交易中的攻防等等其它我们从不看做是战争的东西，现在全都可能让我们大跌眼镜。就是说，敌人可能不是原来意义上的敌人，武器可能不是原来的武器，战场也可能不是原来的战场。什么都不确定。可以确定的就是不确定。牌局已经发生了变化，接下来我们需要的是在种种不确定中确定一种新的打法。它应该不是那种头疼医头，脚疼医脚的单一药方，而是博采众长、集合优势的杂交品种，让一棵梨树上既结桃子又结苹果。这就是组合。其实就连这张牌，我们也早已在前面亮给了大家。 我们还不曾说出的是另外两个字： 加法。 加法就是组合之法。 在拳击场上，一个从头至尾只会用一种拳路与敌周旋的人，显然不是一个能把直拳、刺拳、摆拳和勾拳组合起来，风暴般地击打他人的对手。其中的道理可以说简单得不能再简单：一加一，大于一。问题是，如此简单的连学龄前儿童都明白的道理，在许多对国家的安全、战争的胜败负有责任的人那里，却令人吃惊地模糊不清。这些人尽可以为自己辩护，说他们正是用组合拳的方式在击打对手。他们从未忘记在战场上把技术与技术、战术与战术、武器与武器、手段与手段相加，并且还可以轻蔑地得出结论，组合，这算不上什么新鲜货色。从亚历山大到拿破仑，甚至连施瓦茨科普夫都这么干过。他们不知道懂不懂得组合并不是问题的关节，真正要紧的是你是否懂得把什么与什么进行组合，并且怎样组合？最后的但绝非最不重要的一点是，是否想过把战场与非战场、战争与非战争、军事与非军事，具体点说，就是把隐形飞机、巡航导弹与网络杀手，把核威慑、金融战与恐怖袭击，或者干脆把施瓦茨科普夫＋索罗斯＋小莫里斯＋本·拉丹进行组合？ 这才是我们真正的底牌。 组合也好，加法也好，都不过是一只空筐。只有当筐里加进血腥或残酷时，事情才会变得严峻起来，并开始有一股惊世骇俗的味道。 在这样一种全新的战争观面前，人们已经习惯了的对战争的观感，毫无疑问将受到摇撼。既有的那些传统战争的模式及附丽于其上的伦理和法则，也都将随之面临挑战。较量的结果，不是传统大厦的崩塌，就是新工地一片狼藉。从规律的角度，我们多半将会看到崩塌。 至此，我们等于已经找到了从"高技术"登场开始的这一轮军事革命，迟迟未能完成的原因。从人类历史和战争史上看，从未有过一次军事革命，仅仅在技术革命或编制革命后便宣告完成。只有在标志着这一进程最高成果的军事思想革命出现之后，军事革命的完整过程才会画上句号。这一次也不例外，由高技术引发的新军事革命能否画圆它的句号，取决于它究竟能在军事思想革命的路上走多远，只是这一回，它需要跳出在几千年里战神之车碾出的车辙。 要做到这一点，它就只能求助于加法。而在运用加法之前，它必须超越于一切政治的、历史的、文化的、道德的羁绊之上，进行彻底的思想。没有彻底的思想，就不会有彻底的革命。没有彻底的军事思想，就不会有彻底的军事革命。在此之前，连孙子和克劳塞维茨都把自己锁在了军事领域的栅栏之内，只有马基雅维里逼近过这片思想的空间。以至于在相当长的一段时间里，《君王论》和它的作者都由于其思想的过于超前，而被那些骑士或君子们所不齿。他们当然不会懂得，超越一切限度和界线，这正是思想革命包括军事思想革命的前提。直到今天，那些只懂得在战场上打堂堂之阵，并且以为战争就是杀人，而战法就是杀人方法，除此之外没有什么值得他去注意的人，也同样没能弄懂这一点。 美国人倒还没有迟钝到在这个问题上毫无反应的地步。提出"新军事革命频带宽度"问题的美陆军军事学院战略研究所的斯迪文·麦兹和詹姆斯·凯维特，其实已经敏感到了这一点。他们发现了美国军方在军事思想上与国家安全实际面临的威胁之间的差距。思想滞后于现实（更不要说超越了），这不光是美国军人的毛病，但在美国军人中很典型。"当一支军队过于集中精力对付某个特定类型的敌人"时，就可能会被他视野之外的另一种敌人击败。斯迪文·麦兹和詹姆斯·凯维持正确地表达出了他们对此的忧虑。他们进一步指出，"尽管官方文件强调陆军（我们可以把它理解为整个美军--引者注）必须打破现在西方的思维定式去拓宽对未来冲突的认识，但大多数对21世纪数字化部队将如何作战的描述，听起来好像还是一场用新技术与华约打的装甲战"。因为美军就是在这种军事思维导引下进行战争准备的，他们当然希望战争就像预想的那样撞在自己的枪口上。如此刻舟求剑式的一厢情愿，只会带来一种前景，"当前美军的大多数发展计划，如21世纪陆军等都是着眼于对付常规的重型装甲的敌人，若在下个世纪初美国遇上低技术敌人、中等敌人或是均势敌人的话，就可能出现频带宽度不够的问题"[16]。而实际上美军在下个世纪还未到来之际，就已经遇到了远不止上述三种敌人带来的频带宽度不够的麻烦。无论是黑客的入侵，世贸中心大爆炸，还是本·拉丹的炸弹袭击，都大大超出了美军理解的频带宽度。如何对付这样的敌人，美军显然在心理上和手段上，特别是在军事思想以及由此派生的战法上准备不足。因为他们从未考虑过甚至以有违传统为由拒绝考虑，从军事手段之外去选择作战手段，当然也就不会使它们两者相加组合成新的手段，新的战法。其实只须稍稍打开一点眼界，放纵一下思想，就可能借用技术综合时代涌现的大量新技术和新因素的杠杆，撬动因思维的滞后而生锈的军事革命之轮。在这里，我们可以体味到"它山之石可以攻玉"这句古语的深义。 [16]美国陆军军事学院战略研究所研究报告《战略与军事革命；从理论到政策》。 我们不妨大胆些，把手中的牌完全打乱，重新进行组合，看看会出现什么效果。 假定在两个已经充分信息化的发达国家之间发生了战争，按照传统战法，进攻的一方，一般都会采取大纵深、宽正面、高强度、立体化的模式对敌展开战役突击。其手段不外乎是卫星侦察、电子干扰、大规模空袭加精确打击、地面迂回、两栖登陆、敌后空降……其结果不是敌国宣告战败，就是自己铩羽而归。而用组合战法，则可能完全是另外一番景象，另外一种结局：如，在敌国完全没有察觉的情况下，进攻一方秘密调集大量资金，对其金融市场发动偷袭，引发金融危机后，预先埋设在对方计算机系统中的电脑病毒与黑客分队，再同时对敌进行网络攻击，使其民用电力网、交通调度网、金融交易网、通讯电话网、大众传媒网全面瘫痪，导致其陷入社会恐慌、街头骚乱、政府危机。最后，大军压境，逐步升级地运用军事手段，直到迫敌签订城下之盟。这固然未达孙子"不战而屈人之兵"的境界，但也算得上是"巧战而屈人之兵"吧。两种战法相较，孰优孰劣，不言自明。 这不过只是一种思路。但肯定是一种可行的思路。照此思路，我们只须摇动加法的万花筒，就能组合出幻化无穷的战法花样来。 军事超军事非军事 原子战外交战金融战 常规战网络战贸易战 生化战情报战资源战 生态战心理战经援战 太空战技术战法规战 电子战走私战制裁战 游击战毒品战媒体战 恐怖战虚拟战（威慑）意识形态战 以上任何一种作战样式，都可以与其它一种以上的作战样式相加组合，从而形成全新的战法[17]。不管有意还是无意，超领域、超类型地将不同的作战样式进行集束组合的战法，已经被不少国家运用在了战争实践中。如美国人针对本·拉丹采取的对策就是国家恐怖战＋情报战＋金融战＋网络战＋法规战；再如北约国家针对南联盟科索沃危机使用的是武力威慑＋外交战（联盟）＋法规战的手段；此前联合国在美国的力主下，对伊拉克采取的则是常规战＋外交战＋制裁战＋法规战＋媒体战＋心理战＋情报战等多管齐下的战法。我们还注意到，香港政府在1998年8月的金融保卫战中，对付金融投机家们的手段是金融战＋法规战＋心理战＋媒体战，尽管代价沉重，尚属战果良好。此外，像台湾大量印制人民币伪钞的做法，也很容易成为一种金融战＋走私战的战争手段。 [17]在我们看来，这里的三种类型的战争，都是实实在在的战争，而不是比喻或形容。军事类战争，不论采用什么武器都是传统式的经典战争；非军事类中的各种战争，作为对抗形式，并不出奇，但作为战争行为，它们都是新鲜的；超军事类战争，界于两者之间，有些是过去就有的样式如心理战、情报战，有些则是全新样式像网络战、虚拟战（指电子虚拟，墨子挫败公输班的方法就有虚拟战的成分。见《战国策·宋卫策》《公输班为楚设机械将以攻宋》章）。 从这些例证中，我们可以看出加法－组合在战法运用中的奇妙作用。如果说，以往的战争由于技术手段和条件的限制，从事战争的人们还不能将赢得战争的全部要素随心所欲地加以组合的话，那么今天，以信息技术为前导的技术大爆炸，已为我们提供了这种可能性。只要我们愿意，并且不让主观意图背离客观规律，我们就能根据需要，将手中的牌拼成各种牌型，直至最后赢得整个牌局。 不过，没有谁能给未来的所有战争，开出一份包胜不败的药方。 人类战争史上出现过各种各样的战法，大都随着历史消逝而湮没。究其原因，这些战法都是针对具体目标而定，目标消灭了，战法也就失去了存在的价值。真正有生命力的战法，必须是一只"空筐"，这只空筐仅凭其思路和原理以不变应万变，我们所说的组合，就是这样一只空筐。一只军事思维的空筐。它不同于以往任何针对性很强的战法，只有在筐中装满具体目标和内容时，它才开始有了指向性和针对性。一场战争能否取胜的关键，不在于别的，只在于你能把什么东西装进这只筐里。 中国宋代军事家岳飞在谈到如何运用战法时说，"运用之妙，存乎一心"。这话听上去虽然很玄，但却是对正确使用组合手段唯一准确的解释。只有理解了这一点，我们才能获得一种超越于众多战法之上的战法。这就是万法归一。甚至是战法的终结。除了组合本身无所羁绊的超越性，你无法想象还有什么战法能够超越出组合之网。 结论就这么简单，但肯定不会出自简单的头脑。