BIG FIGHTING PLAN: Critique of Plans on the Level of Tank
In the realm of strategy and warfare, there exist different types of plans, each with its unique characteristics and underlying principles. One of the most intriguing and controversial is the concept of a "plan on the level of tank" – a military strategy that prioritizes boldness and decisive action, with little emphasis on finesse or subtlety. This approach is often associated with reckless abandon, but can be an effective tactic in the right circumstances.
The World War I Heritage
The term "plan on the level of tank" originates from the trenches of World War I, where the introduction of tanks revolutionized warfare. These lumbering, heavily armored vehicles were designed to break through entrenched enemy lines, turning the tide of battle in favor of the attackers. The tank’s brute force and unyielding persistence inspired a new breed of military leaders who sought to apply similar principles to other aspects of combat.
Principles of Big Fighting Plans
A plan on the level of tank is characterized by the following key principles:
- Initiative: Seize the initiative and assert control over the battlefield through bold, assertive action.
- Mass: Concentrate force and momentum, overwhelming the enemy with sheer numbers and kinetic energy.
- Decision: Be willing to make swift, decisive decisions, even if they are not perfect or perfectly informed.
- Battle-Winning: Prioritize breaking through or defeating the enemy, rather than achieving a tactical stalemate or withdrawal.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Big fighting plans, like those inspired by the tank, can be effective in several ways:
- Surprise and Disruption: Unpredictability and speed can catch opponents off guard, creating opportunities for success.
- Fear and Respect: Opponents may be deterred or impressed by the sheer ferocity of the attack, leading to concessions or retreat.
- Tactical Advantage: A concentrated and focused force can outmaneuver and outgun dispersed or uncoordinated opponents.
However, this approach also has significant drawbacks:
- Risk: Unplanned and uncoordinated action can lead to poor morale, unnecessary casualties, and loss of initiative.
- Resistance and Adaptation: The enemy may adapt to the relentless assault, hardening in place and forcing the attacker to reassess their strategy.
- Bleeding the Strong: Opponents, especially those with well-prepared defenses, can absorb the initial shock and then retaliate with devastating effect.
In Conclusion
Plans on the level of tank, while often associated with recklessness, can be a successful and effective approach in certain situations. However, it is crucial to carefully weigh the potential benefits against the risks and consider the specific context of the conflict. A true master of strategy must balance audacity with prudence, incorporating elements of both finesse and force to achieve victory. As the great military strategist Carl von Clausewitz once said, "Plans are nothing. Planning is everything."
