To be fair, a blitzekrieg war is their only option since their ammo stockpile can last like two weeks.
Ladakh Flash Point
- Thread starter Mt1701d
- Start date
- Status
To be fair, a blitzekrieg war is their only option since their ammo stockpile can last like two weeks.
PiSigma
"the engineer"
A blitzkrieg depends on mobility by sending troops behind enemy lines and flanking back and cutting off the rear. India have terrible mobility and there are those pesky mountains in the way. The fact their generals don't understand the basic principles of what blitzkrieg is shows you the quality of their officer corps.
To claim not only they can practice blitzkrieg, but practice it like the Wehrmacht is in my opinion telling.
There are two different connotations to blitzkrieg. One is any simple quick and forceful attack that achieves one time success speed and shock.
The other is the full monte practiced by the Wehrmacht during WWII that enable the Wehrmacht to achieve repeated success through flexible forceful attacks. It’s secret is not really speed and shock, but a highly flexible bottom up command culture (in the german army every officer was expected to be able to perform the job of his next two levels of superiors competently, so a squad leader is expected to be able command a company competently, and a company commander is expected to be able to command a regiment competently, and a battalion command a division) to support goal rather than method oriented approach to tactics (Auftragstaktik), and close coordination between different branch of services.
The Auftragstaktik core of the German blitzkrieg is very difficult culturally and organizationally to pull off. British, American and soviet forces all emphasize Auftragstaktik and preach it it’s virtues. but they generally can’t practice it except with only a small select part of command organization responsible for special forces. Only the Germans during the first half of WWII and maybe to an somewhat lesser extent the Israelis up to maybe 1973 managed to practice it across a large segment of field formations.
I find it difficult to believe the Indian army would have been able to adopt the command cultural required to replicate Auftragstaktik. In fact, I suspect many people in the Indian army who thinks it can pull off “blitzkrieg” like the “Wehrmacht” wouldn’t even know what Auftragstaktik is.
There are two different connotations to blitzkrieg. One is any simple quick and forceful attack that achieves one time success speed and shock.
The other is the full monte practiced by the Wehrmacht during WWII that enable the Wehrmacht to achieve repeated success through flexible forceful attacks. It’s secret is not really speed and shock, but a highly flexible bottom up command culture (in the german army every officer was expected to be able to perform the job of his next two levels of superiors competently, so a squad leader is expected to be able command a company competently, and a company commander is expected to be able to command a regiment competently, and a battalion command a division) to support goal rather than method oriented approach to tactics (Auftragstaktik), and close coordination between different branch of services.
The Auftragstaktik core of the German blitzkrieg is very difficult culturally and organizationally to pull off. British, American and soviet forces all emphasize Auftragstaktik and preach it it’s virtues. but they generally can’t practice it except with only a small select part of command organization responsible for special forces. Only the Germans during the first half of WWII and maybe to an somewhat lesser extent the Israelis up to maybe 1973 managed to practice it across a large segment of field formations.
I find it difficult to believe the Indian army would have been able to adopt the command cultural required to replicate Auftragstaktik. In fact, I suspect many people in the Indian army who thinks it can pull off “blitzkrieg” like the “Wehrmacht” wouldn’t even know what Auftragstaktik is.
Last edited:
The Wehrmacht didn't really use terms like 'blitzkrieg' or 'Auftragstaktik.' If there is a single doctrinal concept that was specifically emphasized, it was Schwerpunkt, which was coined by Clausewitz and taken up by Guderian in developing his panzer theory, and then actually implemented on the field. But none of these developments took place in a vacuum inside the German Officer Corps. Both the British and Soviet theorists were studying ways to restore mobility and long-range independent group operations after the events of WWI. People like Hart, Fuller, Guderian and others in the Soviet side were simply rediscovering Mongolian tactics which many credit as the basis of all of these developments. Of course, as the war started, reality struck again, as Rommel found out in North Africa. It turned out the ground-game wasn't the star of the show anymore, because without air supremacy, you're mainly just target practice for the Air Force. It's an irony of military history that the general's quest for ultimate mobility is what reduced the importance of the Army, as the ultimate mobility is not on the ground, it's in the air.
Last edited:
This thread should unironically be locked if this same single persistent indian troll just keep spamming the same nonsensical drivel from indian copes about how india is winning (lol) the clashes that have happened and thoroughly been discussed months ago. The phrase of 赢麻了 or even the classic story of 啊Q by luxun capture the behavior of this kind of people very well who just can't stop overdosing with the copium, thus making the discussion fruitless from the very beginning.
I apologize for posting evidence that runs contrary to the preferred narrative here.
I know you think you're smug but your Chinese equivalent in any indian forum would have been banned already.
"Last October 20, I wrote an in Asia Times entitled, “India is nowhere in the world, denial won’t work.” More than a thousand Indians from India and the Indian diaspora sent me insulting and abusive emails. I didn’t feel sad about those emails. Rather, they made me laugh, and I felt pity for those who sent them."
It reminds me of another article about the Indians.
"Most online trolls will challenge your arguments, post disinformation, deflect via whataboutery or call you names. Hindu nationalist trolls are collectively obsessed with wanting to rape my wife, daughter, and mother.
I'm not exaggerating. If I had a $1 for every rape threat I've received in the past 72 hours, I'd have more than $100. This is not normal behaviour. That this specific kind of threat is received over and over again and exclusively from Hindu nationalist trolls speaks to a real sickness."
Is it against forum rules to post neutral evidence that goes against the preffered narrative here?
- Status